Bugs and Patch Changes v1.5

[Red Harvest]

I'm going to start this thread as a placeholder for when the patch arrives sometime in the next 48 hours. (If Mods object, etc. then delete or lock as appropriate.)

The Readme is nice but it is general, and as it states it probably omits a number of small or subtle changes...or perhaps uses classic British understatement. So what I hope to do in this thread is to compile a list of changes and fixes that have been implemented compared to RTW 1.3. I will try to edit to maintain a list of what we find (although I could be out of pocket for a considerable time in the coming weeks--so a moderator might want to take over if I don't appear for an extended time after the patch is released.) Some general guidelines:
1. Contribute what you observe that is different/changed.
2. For obvious things like changed stats, just provide before/after number.
3. If you are uncertain about something that requires some testing, it might be best to have a separate thread to discuss it and flesh it out before adding it to the list.
4. CA comments would of course be very helpful toward compiling a complete supplemental list.

A similar thread for BI 1.6 might be useful. I'm not a good candidate for managing the BI list, as I don't have BI at the moment and won't have any "history" to compare. (Hopefully this RTW patch will prompt me to remedy that, and change my sig.) :san_grin:

And as always...a separate bug/workaround type list would be handy to keep in a different thread. Bugs of course could be in this thread, assuming they are *changes* from the previous release, not pre-existing bugs.

EDIT to begin lists for RTW 1.5, looks like my original format is going to require changing:
Undocumented fixed/changed items.
1. Officers seem to all have their weapons now. Before they had a tendency to show up for battle at times with no sword. Lots of punching... (Several...need more time to confirm.)
2. British Generals have been upgraded to 5 def. skill from 1. (Red Harvest.)
3. Generals_unit_upgrade added for Pontus "East Pontic Generals"
4. The AI has resumed using its warcry more consistently. In 1.3 it would often not warcry when attacking. In 1.5 it seems more prone to do so...including in custom tests. Glad to see this back! (Red Harvest)

Confirmed officially documented fixed items.
1. Naval invasion seems to be working according to initial reports. (Many.)
2. The AI uses its pila now. (Many.)
3. Barb Archer Rebel/Slave officer removed.
4. Spear warbands now have secondary swords and slightly lower cost/upkeep.
5. Berserker hit points have been cut to 2, and armour increased to 2. Recruiting and armour/weapon upgrade cost have been increased.
6. Memory leak has been partially fixed. It takes much longer to get the same level of leak. However, symptoms are exactly the same as before. CA gets partial credit.
7. Javelin skirmish AI appears to be improved. It is more likely to use them as skirmishers now. Archers/slingers still have some serious issues (not firing at times, marching through enemy fire, etc.) but they do seem to behave more like skirmishers on average.


Unfixed issues.
1. The two highest level horse temples are still buildable for Gaul, etc. and should not be according to the messages provided onscreen. (Red Harvest, many others) EDIT: Confirmed by Intrepid Sidekick/Capt. Fishpants, the two highest level horse temples should be buildable by Roman factions only.
2. SPQR still has Greek family members. (Seasoned Alcoholic)
3. Some reports of not having control of reinforcements in battle. (Various.)
4. "Short_pike" does not work properly. Phalanx units with it won't shoulder arms when phalanx is toggled off, and when attacked in phalanx, the pikes don't seem to hold the enemy off at all, the whole first row switches to swords. (Red Harvest.)

New 1.5 Bugs
1. AI seems to be able to very successfully use pila after it engages in melee...even after it did the initial hurl and charge. (Red Harvest.)
2. Academy class buildings might not be providing intended law bonus. (Barbarossa82.)
3. Disasters don't seem to work properly. The triggers are unreliable now (and appeared to be in 1.3 as well.) I've not seen a storm at sea in 1.3 or 1.5. I can get Etna to smoke, but not erupt (except for the historical event.) I have seen two floods, but no deaths from them. Have so far been unable to trigger a quake, or drought, or storm at sea in 1.5.. I know the disaster file is getting referenced, since I can make Etna smoke (by plugging in a coordinate as well as a frequency.)
4. Slave resources don't seem to be adding to population anywhere, even when the growth icon shows they should. There is growth in year zero, but none of the projected slave population growths are actually received. (Pode, Germanvs, and others. Confirmed.)
5. There have been quite a few reports of problems with siege towers, particularly the larger ones. Typically, men will mill about running in and out and can't be commanded. Eventually, they move up the tower. Sometimes they bypass the tower and end up on the wall before the ramp opens, this can cause a CTD. (MAt, and others.)
6. There is no option to turn off the battle timer in provincial campaigns. (Red Harvest)
7. During a Civil War test (as provincial campaign using straightforward descr_strat diplomacy mod) found that agreeing to a ceasefire with an AI Roman faction allows them to siege and blockade without being at war...and if the player's popularity is low, he can't counterattack in any way, leaving him helpless. It looks like the AI cannot attack ships or armies, but it can siege and blockade. War continues against other Roman factions. (Red Harvest)

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

With regards to a new RTW v1.5 bugs thread, it may be useful to everyone if the first page documents the entire list of encountered (and confirmed) bugs. I'm taking this idea straight from Kraxis' Sticky BI bugs thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=54690). Before anyone posts a potentially new bug they should double-check the entire list to date to avoid duplications. It would need to be updated on a frequent (perhaps daily) basis, depending on how many members are posting in there.

Perhaps once the patch is released, someone could post the final readme version in here, and this could prevent duplications on this topic. It may contain a few more documented changes / fixes than what CA have already provided.

[Kekvit Irae]

I have plans for a RTW Bugs/BI Bugs/Undocumented Features thread to sticky so there will be only one sticky instead of three. All I need is someone dedicated enough to maintain it

[Catiline]

The different flavours of RTW/Bi probably need different threads for bug I think. This one's stickied for now, to merge with BI bugs at a later date

[Zawath]

I think Golden band are much better now. I don't remember their original stats but they seem a bit higher.

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

RTW v1.5

SPQR start with 2 Greek-named family members. It appears that their names are generated at random at the start of a new imperial campaign.

Of course, it depends how you interpret this as to what you believe it to be.

How do I interpret the SPQR starting with 2 greek-named family members? No comment :san_grin:

[EDIT:]Double-checked descr_strat and there aren't any entries in the family section under Romans_Senate for these 2 named charachters. Looks to be bugged.

[Barbarossa82]

The Imperial German Bodyguard and the Hunnic warlord look fine to me, but the Chosen Archer thing is just frightful. They kind of look like Bobba Fett. How the @#&% did that slip past QA? I mean it's not something you'd miss with even a cursory glance at them, and since they CHANGED them, you'd really think they'd bother to look at them.

[Red Harvest]

1. AI is using its pila, but the implementation is whacked. In hastati vs. hastati match up I just did they both throw, then charge...then the AI halts in melee switches back to pila...AND throws again...successfully. How the hell do they get away with this??? The implementation of pila has always been wierd about the charge (often blunting it.) I'm going to break out a separate topic on this...

2. AI archers are still dolts so no apparent improvement there. It will still march its longer range archers up to my line, get shot to pieces, then try to run away. It did this with enemy hastati captain and enemy archer auxilia vs. my triarii captain and roman archer. My hopes for improved missile unit AI have been dashed.

[Barbarossa82]

From the patch readme:

"Academy-class buildings now give a law bonus, as they do in the BI expansion pack. These buildings now have uses in cities without governors or generals in residence"

There is nothing on the info scrolls for the academy-class buildings to indicate that they have that effect. Has it been implented or not?

[Hurin_Rules]

Professorspatula:

Are you saying that 1.5/6 makes it HARDER or EASIER to get command stars? 1.3 and BI made it much harder to get them, so if 1.5/6 made it even harder than that, I will be pretty annoyed; if they made it easier, then good for them.

Thanks

[professorspatula]

The Imperial German Bodyguard and the Hunnic warlord look fine to me, but the Chosen Archer thing is just frightful. They kind of look like Bobba Fett. How the @#&% did that slip past QA? I mean it's not something you'd miss with even a cursory glance at them, and since they CHANGED them, you'd really think they'd bother to look at them.

Well this is what I experience:
------------------------------

Imperial German Bodyguard:
https://img327.imageshack.us/img327/350/rometwbi20051214163031153ud.th.jpg (https://img327.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rometwbi20051214163031153ud.jpg)

Hunnic General:
https://img416.imageshack.us/img416/5813/rometwbi20051214163824544lk.th.jpg (https://img416.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rometwbi20051214163824544lk.jpg)

It's amazing how many units still have messed up textures (often basic alpha channel issues) and also messed up models. The quality assurance people are my heroes.

[Barbarossa82]

My mistake about the bodyguards, Professor. On closer inspection I do have those odd floating artifacts at the corners of the shields.

About the Hun guy though, this is weird. I tried both custom battles and campaign battles with Hun generals and captains, and saw nothing amiss. Then I decide to take a screenshot to prove it - and the stupid red rectangle shows up in the screenshot! I swear it isn't there on my monitor during the battles though. This isn't the first time I've seen differences between what I saw in a battle and what came out on the screenshot. Might be some graphics card weirdness I guess.

My screenshot of the Hun general:

https://img363.imageshack.us/img363/1738/hun8bk.th.jpg (https://img363.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hun8bk.jpg)

[professorspatula]

Professorspatula:

Are you saying that 1.5/6 makes it HARDER or EASIER to get command stars? 1.3 and BI made it much harder to get them, so if 1.5/6 made it even harder than that, I will be pretty annoyed; if they made it easier, then good for them.

Thanks

Well I just took a quick look, and it appears easier to get points towards the good commander traits, but at the same time, you need a few more points to get each level of the trait. So overall it's probably a little easier to get a good commander which is welcome. It also appears it's more difficult to lose command stars too. Hurrah.

[Rilder]

I just knoticed that Public order seems harder to maintain for barbarian factions i think, i loaded up my Saxons Game and before i patched all my cities were green, then i loaded up after i patched and Most of them were Red Faced or at least blue, i had to up garisons by like 50 percent

[Red Harvest]

So far all my officers/captains have actually had weapons, rather than punching at opponents as in 1.3. This appears to have been fixed.

I've seen some initial reports that reinforcements are still prone to be under AI control. No confirmation yet.

The temple of horse upgrade problem is still there. Very puzzling that this simple edit wasn't made.

[Red Harvest]

Ok, this new pila issue is definitely a bug. I just had a scutarii ram my phalanx FOUR times and each time it start "reloading" it's pila AFTER melee began. It inflicted quite a few casualties this way, even though it took plenty as well. This is a very poor implementation of getting the units to use their pila in a charge, because in many cases they are instead switching to them after they run in. It is better than not having the AI use its pila at all...but it has introduced a new problem that actually seems to favor the AI.

Also, in the "not fixed" category is "short_pike." It behaves just the same as it did in 1.3. Units with "short_pike" never leave the phalanx style animation, whether or not phalanx is turned off (they don't shoulder pikes.) The phalanx itself still does not work like one when short_pike is used. All the enemy troops penetrate past the pikes so the phalanx switches to swords in the first row.

[Jambo]

I'll have to check that one Red.

Interestingly, it's actually a tactic I've used regularly against the AI, particularly when fighting on walls! I'd press the standard attack button which would geet my troops to throw pila then charge. Then once engaged, I'd press it a second time to get them to throw another round of pila whilst engaged. Seemed to work for me, so until I try fighting against AI pila troops I'll reserve my judgement on this one.

[Rilder]

for 1.5, What did they do to Germania!?!?!

this is early in my scipii campaign.
https://img203.imageshack.us/img203/1876/923le.jpg

[Jambo]

I personally reckon CA have upped the ante when it comes to AI aggression. Like the previous poster's minimap screenshot shows, the AI doesn't hold back on its conquest anymore.

In my Scipii campaign the Seleucids and Macedonians have been destroyed by 250 BC. The Julii aren't sitting passively with the Gauls which they too often did in previous versions and the Brutii are having a tough time of it against the Greeks. A constant stream of Carthaginian ships has prevented my Scipii navy doing too much to help expansion early doors and they've been landing army upon army onto Sicily.

[aw89]

for 1.5, What did they do to Germania!?!?!

this is early in my scipii campaign.
https://img203.imageshack.us/img203/1876/923le.jpg

It seems much more random, in my 1.5 camp (brutii) the britons has northern france and germany, the germans have been pushed east. the seluids seem strongern in that camp. too.

This would need to be confirmed ofcourse.

[Red Harvest]

for 1.5, What did they do to Germania!?!?!

this is early in my scipii campaign.
https://img203.imageshack.us/img203/1876/923le.jpg

That was fairly normal before. Gaul gets carved up amongst the Julii, Germania, and the Britons. In the next phase Briton and the Julii begin to carve up Germania.

A more accurate question would be "What is happening to Gaul?" Gaul simply doesn't have much of a chance because it has four flanks to protect: Spain, Britannia, Germania, and the Julii. Factions in a corner do better as long as they have land mass to expand out onto--and enough of a base economy/poplulation to power the expansion: Briton and Egypt do well for this reason. Scythia suffers from having such a huge landmass, with little economic power or population. Numidia suffers from a weak economy (and weak units for autocalc.) Meanwhile, the Julii, Brutii, and Scipii are all effectively in a corner, since their backs are to one another and they can expand outward.

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

I personally reckon CA have upped the ante when it comes to AI aggression. Like the previous poster's minimap screenshot shows, the AI doesn't hold back on its conquest anymore.

Well, if you check out the default diplomacy for all factions in descr_strat, you'll see that many factions have been made to act more aggressively toward one another, as below:


; >>>> start of diplomacy section <<<<
;DS_ALLIED = 0
;DS_SUSPICIOUS = 100
;DS_NEUTRAL = 200
;DS_HOSTILE = 400
;DS_AT_WAR = 600

core_attitudes romans_julii, -10 romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_julii, 400 carthage
core_attitudes romans_julii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_brutii, -10 romans_julii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_scipii, -10 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_senate, -10 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes romans_senate, 600 slave
core_attitudes macedon, 90 romans_brutii
core_attitudes macedon, 600 slave
core_attitudes egypt, 410 numidia
core_attitudes egypt, 600 slave
core_attitudes seleucid, 410 parthia
core_attitudes seleucid, 600 slave
core_attitudes carthage, 310 romans_julii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes carthage, 90 numidia
core_attitudes carthage, 90 spain
core_attitudes carthage, 600 slave
core_attitudes parthia, 90 armenia
core_attitudes parthia, 600 slave
core_attitudes pontus, 410 armenia
core_attitudes pontus, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 410 romans_julii, spain
core_attitudes gauls, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 90 germans, britons
core_attitudes germans, 90 gauls
core_attitudes germans, 310 britons
core_attitudes germans, 600 slave
core_attitudes britons, 310 germans
core_attitudes britons, 600 slave
core_attitudes armenia, 90 parthia
core_attitudes armenia, 600 slave
core_attitudes dacia, 90 romans_julii
core_attitudes dacia, 410 germans
core_attitudes dacia, 600 slave
core_attitudes greek_cities, 410 romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes greek_cities, 600 slave
core_attitudes numidia, 90 carthage
core_attitudes numidia, 600 slave
core_attitudes scythia, 600 slave
core_attitudes spain, 410 carthage
core_attitudes spain, 600 slave
core_attitudes thrace, 310 romans_brutii
core_attitudes thrace, 300 dacia
core_attitudes thrace, 600 slave
core_attitudes slave, 600 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate, macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace

This is what I've changed the diplomacy section to:


; >>>> start of diplomacy section <<<<
;DS_ALLIED = 0
;DS_SUSPICIOUS = 100
;DS_NEUTRAL = 200
;DS_HOSTILE = 400
;DS_AT_WAR = 600

core_attitudes romans_julii, 100 romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_julii, 200 gauls
core_attitudes romans_julii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 100 romans_julii, romans_scipii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 200 macedon
core_attitudes romans_brutii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 100 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_senate
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 200 carthage
core_attitudes romans_scipii, 600 slave
core_attitudes romans_senate, 100 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes romans_senate, 200 macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace
core_attitudes romans_senate, 600 slave
core_attitudes macedon, 300 romans_brutii
core_attitudes macedon, 100 dacia
core_attitudes macedon, 200 thrace
core_attitudes macedon, 300 greek_cities
core_attitudes macedon, 600 slave
core_attitudes egypt, 200 numidia
core_attitudes egypt, 300 seleucid
core_attitudes egypt, 600 slave
core_attitudes seleucid, 300 parthia
core_attitudes seleucid, 200 pontus
core_attitudes seleucid, 100 greek_cities
core_attitudes seleucid, 300 egypt
core_attitudes seleucid, 200 armenia
core_attitudes seleucid, 600 slave
core_attitudes carthage, 300 romans_julii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes carthage, 100 numidia
core_attitudes carthage, 100 spain
core_attitudes carthage, 600 slave
core_attitudes parthia, 100 armenia
core_attitudes parthia, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes parthia, 600 slave
core_attitudes pontus, 200 armenia
core_attitudes pontus, 200 greek_cities
core_attitudes pontus, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes pontus, 600 slave
core_attitudes gauls, 300 romans_julii
core_attitudes gauls, 300 spain
core_attitudes gauls, 200 germans
core_attitudes gauls, 100 britons
core_attitudes gauls, 600 slave
core_attitudes germans, 200 gauls
core_attitudes germans, 300 britons
core_attitudes germans, 300 dacia
core_attitudes germans, 600 slave
core_attitudes britons, 300 germans
core_attitudes britons, 100 gauls
core_attitudes britons, 600 slave
core_attitudes armenia, 100 parthia
core_attitudes armenia, 200 seleucid
core_attitudes armenia, 200 scythia
core_attitudes armenia, 600 slave
core_attitudes dacia, 200 romans_julii
core_attitudes dacia, 300 germans
core_attitudes dacia, 100 macedon
core_attitudes dacia, 300 thrace
core_attitudes dacia, 200 scythia
core_attitudes dacia, 600 slave
core_attitudes greek_cities, 300 romans_brutii, romans_scipii
core_attitudes greek_cities, 200 carthage
core_attitudes greek_cities, 100 seleucid
core_attitudes greek_cities, 200 pontus
core_attitudes greek_cities, 300 macedon
core_attitudes greek_cities, 600 slave
core_attitudes numidia, 100 carthage
core_attitudes numidia, 300 egypt
core_attitudes numidia, 600 slave
core_attitudes scythia, 200 armenia
core_attitudes scythia, 200 dacia
core_attitudes scythia, 200 thrace
core_attitudes scythia, 600 slave
core_attitudes spain, 200 carthage
core_attitudes spain, 300 gauls
core_attitudes spain, 600 slave
core_attitudes thrace, 300 romans_brutii
core_attitudes thrace, 200 scythia
core_attitudes thrace, 200 macedon
core_attitudes thrace, 300 dacia
core_attitudes thrace, 600 slave
core_attitudes slave, 600 romans_julii, romans_brutii, romans_scipii, romans_senate, macedon, egypt, seleucid, carthage, parthia, pontus, gauls, germans, britons, armenia, dacia, greek_cities, numidia, scythia, spain, thrace

I've inserted a lot more rows in my modified version to try and improve the chances of survival for most factions. Each faction still remains at war with the rebels (slave), but overall hostilities have been reduced. Why for example have the Julii been given default 410 (just over a hostile diplomatic mentality) towards Carthage? Must be to do with the Senate mission involving Caralis, but other than that, these two factions rarely engage in warfare through the entirity of an imperial campaign.

Also, each faction now at least has a core attitude to their immediate neighbours - before there were scarcely any core attitudes in place. I'm not sure if the AI follows these values by the book, but IMO they required tweaking to avoid campaign maps as displayed above, IE steamrollering factions.

[Jambo]

But any human player will steamroller given the opportunity! In fact in most campaigns I will be looking for my first war in the first few turns.

I think ideally you want a more aggressive AI. Otherwise what you end up with is one human superpower taking advantage of many equally sized AI factions who are all doing very little with outdated troops. This is particularly frustrating when playing with a Roman faction and the other Roman factions are doing very little to further their empire. I remember getting frustrated with the Julii in previous versions as so often they'd simply refuse to attack the Gauls.

Also, remember in RTW one can only replace outdated units when they're killed as this is the only time when unit upkeep is freed. This is where some form of unit upgrading feature would be extremely beneficial to the peaceful factions. Without it though, the AI doesn't disband archaic units and therefore a stagnant AI faction is likely to be one with town militia throughout their armies.

In my mind what makes a good campaign is one where the prevailing factions are different each time. What you don't want is repetition of which AI factions always win.

[Jambo]

For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!

That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.

[Red Harvest]

For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!

That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.

Yes, I've been considering reworking diplomacy to ally various factions against Egypt to try to keep the Seleucids from breaking down immediately. Considering the same for Carthage-Numidia-Spain-Gaul-Britain, it should help Gaul and slow Britain. Numidia might be able to focus its resources into holding Siwa. While these factions will eventually end up fighting amongst one another, at least this would give them a chance to retard the stronger Roman/Egyptian factions.

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

Egypt are definitely the problem faction in the middle east. I'd stripped 3 of their provinces (given them to the rebels) back in RTW v1.2, reduced their population growth rates, starting armies, various unit sizes, stats etc to bring them in line with their neighbours. AFAIK, Egypt were earning around 7000 denarii per turn in an unmodded vanilla copy of RTW. After modification, this is roughly 1000 denari from 3 starting provinces.

Yeah, I suppose you could set the default stances to allies (as with the Romans) so that they have a combined power to fight off Egyptian raids. Tbh, I just like to keep changng things to keep the game interesting, rather than 'same old' each new imperial campaign.

[Puzz3D]

For instance, one nice thing to do with this diplomacy is gang up Parthia and Seleucids on Egypt and encourage Pontus to tackle Armenia rather than Seleucids!

That might balance out the eastern factions and make it a little more interesting.
Sounds good, but if two or three AI factions don't dominate then the human player isn't going to have strong opposition later in the game. Of course, in RTW playing as the Romans you have to eventually beat the other roman families, so there is that challenge.

[Red Harvest]

Sounds good, but if two or three AI factions don't dominate then the human player isn't going to have strong opposition later in the game. Of course, in RTW playing as the Romans you have to eventually beat the other roman families, so there is that challenge.

Yes, but the problem is often *which* factions dominate and how rapidly.

I'm not even sure that I've even had the civil war. By the time that comes around I'm already unstoppable and bored. Starting with the civil war ongoing might be interesting...then it might be a single uber Roman faction that emerges for the late game.

A big problem with the game is that it is structured so that rapid conquest is a necessity, because each turn you sit stagnant you lose more income. So while I might prefer a liesurely pace, I'm forced to fight like a demon to conquer everything, rather than try to hold an empire. As with the tactical map, the strategic play is accelerate. 10 RTW years is about 50 actual years.

[Rilder]

Umm is it just me or is it alot harder to maintain public order? in 1.2-1.3 a small garison of like 2-3 town watch plus a governer allowed very high taxes, now you need a near half to ful stack garison just to pull off normal taxese

[teja]

Oops? I had always use for much more garrison. Big metropolis are not easy to handle, so I use to use lots of peasants. Now akademy helps to maintain order as well.:san_kiss:

[Red Harvest]

Darn, the memory leak is still there. It takes much longer to become a problem...but it still does the same basic thing as it accumulates. CA gets partial credit. They found something...but they didn't find it all.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
One less reason to patch. :gah2:
.

[player1]

Upon inspecting some VnV files, I've noticed that basic RTW got some of the fixes I previously added only to BI version of bug-fixer.

Also, I think many of bug-fixer fixes were added in BI version too.

At first glance I would say at least half of them.
Maybe something is missing, but it would take a long research time.

Anyway, we consider trait system much less buggy then before.

[C-F]

Upon inspecting some VnV files, I've noticed that basic RTW got some of the fixes I previously added only to BI version of bug-fixer.

Also, I think many of bug-fixer fixes were added in BI version too.

At first glance I would say at least half of them.
Maybe something is missing, but it would take a long research time.

Anyway, we consider trait system much less buggy then before.


Well, this one is back...:san_cry:

https://img465.imageshack.us/img465/6844/templesnafu3am.th.jpg (https://img465.imageshack.us/my.php?image=templesnafu3am.jpg)

I think you're right - there will not be an easy solution for 'the other half'...:san_sad:

[Red Harvest]

Well, this one is back...:san_cry:

https://img465.imageshack.us/img465/6844/templesnafu3am.th.jpg (https://img465.imageshack.us/my.php?image=templesnafu3am.jpg)

I think you're right - there will not be an easy solution for 'the other half'...:san_sad:

That's not a trait. That is poor editing by CA on the temples. Why they even have higher level horse temples is beyond me. Rome isn't allowed to build the base level temples but can build higher level versions? And why in the world should Rome get huge bonuses for their already overly powerful cavalry.

It's easy enough to edit out...been doing it for awhile.

[C-F]

....

It's easy enough to edit out...been doing it for awhile.

Well, thats why I liked the bugfixer - I didn't (can't) have to...:san_wink:

[Red Harvest]

Well, thats why I liked the bugfixer - I didn't (can't) have to...:san_wink:
It is ironic that back when we were discussing unit stats problems, player1 didn't seem to think much of anything was in error and defended every oddity in the stats and build queue. I gave up trying to reason with him on that, and did my own edits. Then he came out with "bug fixer." I haven't really looked at it. :san_rolleyes:

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

Well, this one is back...:san_cry:

https://img465.imageshack.us/img465/6844/templesnafu3am.th.jpg (https://img465.imageshack.us/my.php?image=templesnafu3am.jpg)

I think you're right - there will not be an easy solution for 'the other half'...:san_sad:

You think this is bad, look what I've got to sort out:

Random Temples etc (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=57938)

:san_rolleyes:

[C-F]

You think this is bad, look what I've got to sort out:

Random Temples etc (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=57938)

:san_rolleyes:

~:eek:
Seems to be on your end - checked mine (just Germania) and its only showing the 3 orig. shrines...

My setup was RTW1.3/BI1.4 with Bugfixer2.06 and Bosook's(sp?) unlock all factions on top ~ figuered reinstall if it doesn't work ~ but it did... all factions are still unlocked and I guess Player1's fixes were just 'overwritten'... to what extend - I have no idea...

I'd try a reinstall if I were you... good luck :bow:

actually, on second thought, I'd redownload the patch before applying it

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

~:eek:
Seems to be on your end - checked mine (just Germania) and its only showing the 3 orig. shrines...

My setup was RTW1.3/BI1.4 with Bugfixer2.06 and Bosook's(sp?) unlock all factions on top ~ figuered reinstall if it doesn't work ~ but it did... all factions are still unlocked and I guess Player1's fixes were just 'overwritten'... to what extend - I have no idea...

I'd try a reinstall if I were you... good luck :bow:

actually, on second thought, I'd redownload the patch before applying it

It really is a joke, I'll have to spend a while trying to figure out what is causing these random temples to appear.

Its definitley my own modded copy of export_decr_buildings.txt which is causing the problems, might try copying a vanilla version over the top, although I'm not expecting anything to change.

I'd originally reinstalled RTW before patching upto v1.5, what I tend to do is replace selected text files with my own modded versions.

The temple of horse issue seems relatively straightfoward to fix, here is the vanilla RTW v1.5 code from export_descr_buildings:


building temple_of_horse
{
levels temple_of_horse_shrine temple_of_horse_temple temple_of_horse_large_temple temple_of_horse_awesome_temple temple_of_horse_pantheon
{
temple_of_horse_shrine requires factions { spain, gauls, }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 1
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 1
}
construction 1
cost 400
settlement_min town
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_temple
}
}
temple_of_horse_temple requires factions { spain, gauls, }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 2
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 2
}
construction 2
cost 800
settlement_min large_town
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_large_temple
}
}
temple_of_horse_large_temple requires factions { spain, gauls, }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 3
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 3
}
construction 3
cost 1600
settlement_min city
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_awesome_temple
}
}
temple_of_horse_awesome_temple
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 4
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 4
}
construction 5
cost 3200
settlement_min large_city
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_pantheon
}
}
temple_of_horse_pantheon
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 5
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 5
}
construction 6
cost 6400
settlement_min huge_city
upgrades
{
}
}
}
plugins
{
}
}

All you need to delete is the extra levels, which in this case are temple_of_horse_awesome_temple and temple_of_horse_pantheon, as well as the 2 unrequired entries.

[player1]

Fix from old bugfixer 2.06


temple_of_horse_awesome_temple requires factions { }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 4
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 4
}
construction 5
cost 3200
settlement_min large_city
upgrades
{
temple_of_horse_pantheon
}
}
temple_of_horse_pantheon requires factions { }
{
capability
{
happiness_bonus bonus 5
recruits_exp_bonus bonus 5
}
construction 6
cost 6400
settlement_min huge_city
upgrades
{
}
}

and explanation:
Graphic glitch with Awesome Temple of Epona and Pantheon


It seems that in 1.3 version of imperial campaign, developers decided to remove the feature that romans can build Epona temples if barbarians already built Circle of Epona. The problem is that they haven't removed feature well, making it in fact available to all factions, which actually gives the graphic glitch in building browser. To fix this I added empty "requires" tag in the line for these buildings, making them disabled for all factions as intended.

[player1]

Some of the models are still messed up in 1.6
Some due to bad textures and models, and some other just because battle_model.txt wasn't updated in patch at all.

From first group, there is still armless Praetorians, or Choosen Axemen that grab axes in different way at different unit models (lods).

Also Paladin Bodyguards still have messed up right side of brestplace (lod2).

I won't comment those bugs due to unapdated battle_models.txt, these are mosty old issues fixed with bug-fixer.

[Pode]

Slave resource no longer adds to population growth rate in any town. Haven't tested whether slaves are still sent to governed towns properly or not. I never played around with 1.3, so this may have been broken/changed in that patch instead of 1.5. Don't know if it's intentional design change or bug, so I posted it here.

[Red Harvest]

Are naval battles more decisive on average now? I've been noticing what appear to be perhaps twice as many casualties per naval encounter...not sure if this is a fluke or what.

[Red Harvest]

Slave resource no longer adds to population growth rate in any town. Haven't tested whether slaves are still sent to governed towns properly or not. I never played around with 1.3, so this may have been broken/changed in that patch instead of 1.5. Don't know if it's intentional design change or bug, so I posted it here.
Pode, you are right, slavery isn't working properly. In fact, it has several accounting errors as I'll demonstrate. (I think it might have been this way in 1.3 as well. People were discussing it, but I wasn't paying attention.)

Try taking Segesta as the Julii. If you enlsave, 450 slaves enter the pool. Immediately, on that same turn, your population in your other two cities grow by 112 each. Leaving a residual of 226 slaves for future depletion/growth.

You will now show a 1.5% boost to population from slaves in Segesta, but when you do the math, you always come up this same 1.5% short in actual growth.

When you build a governor's house and a road, you will get 0.5% additional in Arretium, but each time you check you come up 0.5% short as well.

You should be depleting the slave pool of 226 at a rate of 27+ per turn (after the first two turns at 6 and 6 before the road is complete.) So it should take 10 turns to deplete them. Instead it takes about 18 turns for the icon to disappear...which would be about right IF there were 450 in the pool and IF they actually were going into the population.

So in summary, you only get the initial slave distribution, regardless of roads. After that you never get what is claimed on the growth graphic for slaves.

[professorspatula]

Crivvens! You sure put a lot of effort into finding faults in various aspects of the game. If only CA did the same.

[Barbarossa82]

Crivvens! You sure put a lot of effort into finding faults in various aspects of the game. If only CA did the same.

Yeah, and Red Harvest, Player1, yourself and others are picking these out in the space of a week or so FOR FREE. Whatever they pay the QA people over at CA or Sega (not sure who's handling it), it's probably a little too much.~:pissed:

[Germanvs]

Try taking Segesta as the Julii. If you enslave, 450 slaves enter the pool. Immediately, on that same turn, your population in your other two cities grow by 112 each. Leaving a residual of 226 slaves for future depletion/growth.


The other 226 go to Rome (see the manual, and I can confirm this actually happens). I don't think the bonus 1/2 % extra growth that is indicated have anything to do with the original population of the town conquered.

The bonus city-growth due to slave trading is broken even in 1.2, as far as I could tell (see this post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=889925&postcount=38) , the rest of the thread is also noteworthy).



If I knew how, I would instal a clean RTW (next to my existing one) and see if 1.0 is broken as well. I would not be surprised the whole thing never worked at all.

[Red Harvest]

Germanvs,

Thanks, I just found your posts on this issue in Ludus Magna. (Funny as I did a Segesta test about 48 hours *after* you did.) I didn't realize Rome was getting the other half of the slaves. Manual, who is that? I don't know no stinking manual! :san_laugh: Actually, I still can't find this in the manual, although I believe you.

Seems odd to me that the resource would run out when the 450 figure is hit...

[gardibolt]

I still have an unpatched 1.0 running, so if you tell me what to do I can try it out and report results.

[player1]

From original 1.0 RTW readme:


Population Enslavement
After a settlement is conquered, and "enslavement" is chosen as the option to occupy the settlement. Roman factions and Roman allied factions will have 25% of the population go to the capital of the senate faction.

[Red Harvest]

From original 1.0 RTW readme:

That would explain why I can't find it in the manual, it's in the read me. :san_wink:

[Germanvs]

I still have an unpatched 1.0 running, so if you tell me what to do I can try it out and report results.

Start a campaign as the Julii.
Get the Governor out of Ariminum
Get one of the stacks allready near Segesta to attack and conquer the place.
Enslave the population.
Build Gov. house.
End Turn.
Build road in Segesta.
Hit 'end turn' 5 times.

Report population both in Segesta AND Arretium.
Report as well if you got the Slave-Trader Ancillery (the guy that is supposed to give extra slaves in a city with slave-trade present)

Thanks :b

[Garvanko]

Dunno if its a bug, but I found it strange. Ive just patched to 1.5, and in my Scipii campaign, I set micromanagement to let the AI manage taxes only (as I do sometimes when I can't manage everything), and automatically all taxes were set to the low or normal, while public order rocketed to 130% or more (sometimes even 220%) in most of my cities.

Is it just me, or didn't the AI always manage taxes so as to make as much money as possible while keeping public order i.e. around 90%, rather than keeping the population as happy as possible as is happening now?

[gardibolt]

Start a campaign as the Julii.
Get the Governor out of Ariminum
Get one of the stacks allready near Segesta to attack and conquer the place.
Enslave the population.
Build Gov. house.
End Turn.
Build road in Segesta.
Hit 'end turn' 5 times.

Report population both in Segesta AND Arretium.
Report as well if you got the Slave-Trader Ancillery (the guy that is supposed to give extra slaves in a city with slave-trade present)

Thanks :b
Do I use the Governor from Ariminium in the stack to conquer Segesta, or just let him sit in the countryside?

[Red Harvest]

Do I use the Governor from Ariminium in the stack to conquer Segesta, or just let him sit in the countryside?

You don't need him, you've got two other small stacks standing there with family members. Either one of them will suffice.

[gardibolt]

OK, I ran four tests as described above in unpatched, unmodded 1.0 vanilla RTW. In all four, the populations were as follows:

Segesta: 492
Arretium: 4644
Ariminium: 3941

The shackles appeared every time, but I never got the Slave Trader. The first and fourth tests, I got no retainer. Test 2, I got the Body Slave. Test 3, I got the Exotic Slave.
I see from the Ludus Magna thread that you were ending up in Winter 267, which is 6 End Turns as far as I can tell. In Winter 267, the populations are as follows:

Segesta: 499
Arretium: 4714
Ariminium: 4020

Does that help? It looks like in 1.5 the Arretium pop is getting some kind of major boost from something.

For comparison's sake, I also ran exactly the same steps, except occupying and exterminating in Segesta in the 1.0 program.

Occupy:
Segesta: 985 in end turn 5/1000 in end turn 6 (winter 267)
Arretium: 4461/4528
Ariminium: 3941/4020

Exterminate:
Segesta: 436/443
Arretium: 4461/4528
Ariminium: 3941/4020

[Germanvs]

Thanks.

Perhaps the base farming level has been raised from V1.0?

Base farming in 1.5 is (Summer 270 turn):
2% (4 grain icons) for Segesta
3% (7 grain + 1 farm - 2 squalor) for Arretium)
(Ariminum is 3% as well, same fractions as Arretium)

Nevertheless, I think it is save to assume the slave bonus for city-growth is broken in 1,0 as well :san_sad:

I had a slave-trader once in a test, but that did not affect the outcome at all.

[Red Harvest]

You really need the growth percentages to interpret (total shown, and slave % shown), as the values could differ between versions. Wasn't the province to province grain bonus broken in 1.0? I remember some comments about it but I never looked into it.

Also descr_strat has changed since 1.0 IIRC. So the starting populations might even differ.

[Red Harvest]

I don't think the bonus 1/2 % extra growth that is indicated have anything to do with the original population of the town conquered.

You are correct. It appears that the slave resource lasts 10 years, then expires. I did a quick test in Parthia.

[Intrepid Sidekick]

Well, this one is back...:san_cry:

https://img465.imageshack.us/img465/6844/templesnafu3am.th.jpg (https://img465.imageshack.us/my.php?image=templesnafu3am.jpg)

I think your right - there will not be an easy solution for 'the other half'...:san_sad:
C-F Perhaps you should check your own image you provide.
The "bug" "is not back". You have modded the game to allow you to play the Spanish and you have then given them access to a "Roman Faction only" building.
We don't support bugs accidentaly created by modification of the game data, never have, never will do. How can we possibly fix a problem you created?

[Captain Fishpants]

That's not a trait. That is poor editing by CA on the temples. Why they even have higher level horse temples is beyond me. Rome isn't allowed to build the base level temples but can build higher level versions? And why in the world should Rome get huge bonuses for their already overly powerful cavalry.

It's easy enough to edit out...been doing it for awhile.

I checked with the people responsible, and the Epona temples were a deliberate design decision. Many cavalry barracks did include a small shrine to Epona, as the worship of the horse god seemed a practical benefit to the Roman cavalry and so the practice spread across the Empire.

The Romans can't *start* a "Temple of Horse" line in a settlement, but if they capture a settlement with an intact temple they can improve it and make it part of their system. That's the explanation - it's a bit of "local colour", and a nice benefit feature if you find it. It is most definitely not "poor editing" (I *love* the way that there's an automatic assumption that we're all numpties).

Edit:

Unfortunately, it appears that one of us may be a numpty after all. An unauthorised somebody went into the file and "improved" matters on his own say-so (a) without actually checking on the design intent (b) without bothering to tell anyone that he had done this and (c) without actually having responsibility for this area of the game. This has caused problems. A little knowledge, and all that kind of thing... So, sorry guys. Intrepid Sidekick is currently off applying a small amount of boot toe to certain bottoms.

[player1]

But why are from 1.3 (and still in 1.5), removed


temple_of_horse_awesome_temple requires factions { roman, }

...

temple_of_horse_pantheon requires factions { roman, }


...these bold lines that existed in 1.0/1.2???

When I made bug-fixer for 1.3 and 1.5 I considered that it was "revison" decision by CA, to remove access to these temples from romans (why edit it otherwise?)

Anyway, only thing that edit did was to make these temples available to "all factions (no require tags means available to "all" not "none"), which gave graphic glitchs for gaul and spain factions.


Anyway, it is an error in editing, since it should be either as it was in 1.2, or removed (like in bug-fixer).


EDIT:
I released bug-fixer for 1.5/1.6 yesterday

[C-F]

C-F Perhaps you should check your own image you provide.
The "bug" "is not back". You have modded the game to allow you to play the Spanish and you have then given them access to a "Roman Faction only" building.
We don't support bugs accidentaly created by modification of the game data, never have, never will do. How can we possibly fix a problem you created?


You are absolutely right. - poor wording on my part...sorry :bow:

btw, I only 'applied' a(two) mod(s) [bugfixer from player1 and factionunlock from Bosook (SP?)] that I downloaded here and then started; I didn't give or take away anything in the game (I'm not a modder/programmer) - the reason being is, that I am trying to get the tech trees for all the factions in the game that were not published.

In my case you could fix it in giving us all the tech trees (I didn't create this problem :san_wink: ), fix the skins and the other little things that are addressed in those above mentioned mods...et all :san_rolleyes:

I look at it as being in a 'drive thru': nowadays it is a challenge to get but the simplest order right. RTW and BI are not simple and I guess a lot of people are just afraid that many of the 'issues' will remain as the time and-financial clock is ticking - after that (@ the game over part), only the pride and dedication of the individual programmers will remain...:san_sad:

Again, no offense intended, I did get my 'fix' in player1's release 3.0 :san_wink:

PS, while on the subject of helping, is it possible to get info on what "Improved general's bodyguards" does and wether it is the same for every faction...it would take the last ?-mark off my 'homemade' techtrees (I think...). Thanks in advance.

[Red Harvest]

I checked with the people responsible, and the Epona temples were a deliberate design decision. Many cavalry barracks did include a small shrine to Epona, as the worship of the horse god seemed a practical benefit to the Roman cavalry and so the practice spread across the Empire.

The Romans can't *start* a "Temple of Horse" line in a settlement, but if they capture a settlement with an intact temple they can improve it and make it part of their system. That's the explanation - it's a bit of "local colour", and a nice benefit feature if you find it. It is most definitely not "poor editing" (I *love* the way that there's an automatic assumption that we're all numpties).

If you look at the intentional changes to the buildings text for the horse temple, and the removal of "requires factions { roman, }" the assumption I made is quite reasonable. Since it was an intentional decision, then the editing was indeed poorly done. The horse temple is now showing up for playable Gauls among others--with that warning graphic IIRC.

I do find the idea of giving Rome even more bonuses for cavalry to two more levels of horse temple a questionable balance issue.

[Red Harvest]

C-F Perhaps you should check your own image you provide.
The "bug" "is not back". You have modded the game to allow you to play the Spanish and you have then given them access to a "Roman Faction only" building.
We don't support bugs accidentaly created by modification of the game data, never have, never will do. How can we possibly fix a problem you created?

This response about it being a modding problem is overused and misapplied unfortunately. This same "warning" shows up as Gauls in vanilla 1.5. That is how I found it with the patch.

The hostility to modding is misplaced. Afterall simple playable faction mods like this turned up problems with the unit line up of Spain and Numidia in vanilla, did they not? These were ones where the unit cards were ready and the units were slotted for the factions, and they were usable in custom, but the AI could not recruit them. The fixes were straightforward once found and CA made the changes to allow them in future patches.

EDIT: Wanted to add that I appreciate CA folks responding to the issues in the thread, thank you. However, you are doing yourself a bit of a disservice by not examining the issue more closely before attributing it to modding. I've seen this same approach used on at least four different issues since 1.2 where the community had already confirmed the problem.

We would all like to hear more about positive things that were changed that didn't make it into the readme. Blow your own horns on these! There are several positive changes that I suspect were done, but I don't have enough confirmation yet to list them at the top of the thread.

[Intrepid Sidekick]

Hello Red Harvest.
I've just taken a look at the source files. Someone (unauthorised) here has in fact removed Roman faction access to Temple of Horse Awesome Temple and to Temple of Horse Pantheon. This is the only faction that should have access to these two buildings.
This has the unfortunate side effect of making those temples accessable to factions that should not have access to those buildings. Hence the "WARNING! This text should never appear on screen!" message.

We are investigating how this happened.

So we do have to hang our heads in shame on this one.

Intrepid Sidekick

[player1]

Hmmm...
I guess I'll make v3.01 of bug-fixer soon...
(and put it back how it was in with patch 1.2 when it worked as intended)

[Jambo]

I admire your honesty and humility Intrepid Sidekick. Thanks for the update. :D

[Haudegen]

I re-edited the higher Epona temples to make them buildable by the Romans in version 1.3. I reported about this some time ago in the Julii guide. (postings # 213, 215, 217)

But I must add that although it basically worked, it came at the cost of game stability. The game crashed to the desktop once or twice in an hour.

If the same thing happens under version 1.5 is still to be found out ...

[Red Harvest]

Hello Red Harvest.
I've just taken a look at the source files. Someone (unauthorised) here has in fact removed Roman faction access to Temple of Horse Awesome Temple and to Temple of Horse Pantheon. This is the only faction that should have access to these two buildings.
This has the unfortunate side effect of making those temples accessable to factions that should not have access to those buildings. Hence the "WARNING! This text should never appear on screen!" message.

We are investigating how this happened.

So we do have to hang our heads in shame on this one.

Intrepid Sidekick

Intrepid Sidekick,

Thank you for checking it, and especially for reporting back.

No reason to hang your heads in shame! It is a small editing thing that can be changed back to how you intended it (whether or not I agree on the balance aspect, LOL.) ...and perhaps add the academy law bonus that appears to have been unintentionally omitted (comparing the file to the 1.5 Readme.) This is little stuff that players/mods can correct if we know the intent.

CA made some considerable improvements with 1.5 as most of us agree. Of the RTW patches released, this one is the best in my opinion. I would of course like to see a couple of hardcoded issues addressed.

Again, most importantly, thanks for the communication. It really is much preferred over us on the outside hypothesizing over design intent. I embarass myself when I guess wrong...

[gardibolt]

Since we have your attention, El Capitan, what about the questions re the slave trade bonus and whether it's working, as discussed upthread?

[C-F]

Hello Red Harvest.
I've just taken a look at the source files. Someone (unauthorised) here has in fact removed Roman faction access to Temple of Horse Awesome Temple and to Temple of Horse Pantheon. This is the only faction that should have access to these two buildings.
This has the unfortunate side effect of making those temples accessable to factions that should not have access to those buildings. Hence the "WARNING! This text should never appear on screen!" message.

We are investigating how this happened.

So we do have to hang our heads in shame on this one.

Intrepid Sidekick


Thanks for your feedback :bow: ~:cheers:

I think this is a wonderful game and we just want to get it 'just right' - shame and hanging heads should definitely not be on anybodys mind that accomplished such complex task in a program and gameplay - I mean that.

[Oaty]

New 1.5 Bugs
1. AI seems to be able to very successfully use pila after it engages in melee...even after it did the initial hurl and charge. (Red Harvest.)
(Red Harvest)


Not an introduced bug. I have been able to hurl pila from an engaged units in multiple ways since patch 1.2 and maybe earlier.

One way is guard mode with fire at will on. The unit can stay engaged and the rear ranks of the unit will throw pila. However if the unit becomes too disrupted it will be unable to throw.

Two just fire at will on. The unit will more likeley becom engaged once hit, but if the unit does not counter attack it can still throw from rear ranks.

Three probably the most obvious is to right pila click on a nearby unit that is within range.


Why this has become suddenly obvious is the fact that the A.I. always has FAW on. And now the A.I. is at the same level as the human.

[Jambo]

One thing that really puzzles me is that Praetorian Cohorts are buildable with Army Barracks+ AND also the Imperial Palace (both now post marian reforms). Didn't they used to be buildable from the Imperial Palace only?

This relative freedom to build the Praetorian Cohort using Barracks and or Palace construction pathways seems to make the other Legionnaire types rather pointless. They're also buildable anywhere on the map, which seems rather unhistoric.

[Rilder]

hmm this is a maby undocumented patch change but i've noticed the reforms happen exact turn you finish your imperial palace, i loaded my 1.2 brutus campaign were i hadnt had the reforms and a imperial in italy then the moment i got to the next turn i got the reforms, further testing i started a scipii campaign and did the add_poulation Capau 5000 then worked up to an imperial and lo and behold as soon as i finished "A New man, Gaius Marius" when it was like 250 bc.

[Red Harvest]

One thing that really puzzles me is that Praetorian Cohorts are buildable with Army Barracks+ AND also the Imperial Palace (both now post marian reforms). Didn't they used to be buildable from the Imperial Palace only?

This relative freedom to build the Praetorian Cohort using Barracks and or Palace construction pathways seems to make the other Legionnaire types rather pointless. They're also buildable anywhere on the map, which seems rather unhistoric.

I had the same question, Jambo and for the same reasons.

[Red Harvest]

Were the Thracian bastarnae intended to have warcry? They don't presently, while the merc bastarnae units do.

Also have been intending to mention that it appears to me that in 1.5 the AI is again using warcry more consistently. It was not doing so in 1.3 and it was costing it in 1vs1 match ups. Glad to see this apparently fixed!

[player1]

heh...
Maybe they are more "civilized" then their mercenary friends?

[Jambo]

lol!

Maybe one to address (Thracian Bastarnae) in the text files.

Red,

I had thought making Praetorians more freely available might have been CA's way of helping the Roman AI factions achieve such dominance over the world, i.e. building up to the supposed civil war climax. This is certainly true, but it also makes it seriously easy for the Romans in the hands of a human to beat up on the rest of the world. Only the tough Greek phalanx units seem to represent a problem. Tying Praetorians to Italy and the Imperial Palace seems the fairest option.

Also, it's a shame to see skirmishers still attacking in melee. This was reportedly fixed but I still see it happening with the Numidian and Greek armies I've been facing as Scipii. I've lengthened the range of skirmishing units from 50 to 60 to hopefully lessen the likelihood of the AI using them in melee.

[player1]

By the way both praetorian and bastarnae are old from 1.3, it's strange that none of the players has mentioned them as an issue.

Seems to me more like a rule change then a bug, but it does have an balancing implications.

[Jambo]

I would have noticed it normally, but this is the first time I've played an Imperial Campaign since the release of BI. Plus I suppose many don't play the Roman factions. I reckon this should only be applicable for the Senate and that for the Roman families their ability to build praetorians should be restricted to Italy and an Imperial Palace.

[Red Harvest]

By the way both praetorian and bastarnae are old from 1.3, it's strange that none of the players has mentioned them as an issue.

Seems to me more like a rule change then a bug, but it does have an balancing implications.

I already knew that the warcry had changed in 1.3. However, the bastarnae and falx of Thracia did not have warcry before 1.3...since it used to be based on culture and unit type, and wasn't a listed attribute. Greeks didn't get it...even Thracian ones from what I recall of testing. I used the Thracian falx vs. the Dacian falx to see how much warcry contributed to attack in testing in 1.2. The addition of warcry to the Thracian falxmen is an improvement made possible by porting RTW to the BI based .exe.

So for the Thracian recruited bastarnae there has been no net change in warcry while for the Thracian falxmen there has.

I haven't called either of the Praetorian or Bastarnae oddities a bug, but I do have doubts as to whether they are configured as CA intended them to be. The Praetorian change doesn't seem to follow the basic logic of the game.

[Zatoichi]

Another warcry related question - before I got BI, when playing as the Romans the warcry ability for mercenary warbands was disabled - now it is enabled. Or am I imagining it? (I am playing a slightly modded version of RTW). Would this relate to what Red Harvest is talking about? I didn't really play 1.3 as I was too busy playing BI - now I've gone back to RTW so maybe this was in 1.3 not introduced in 1.5/6?

[player1]

In 1.2 and before all barbarian units had warcry (if they were melee, not skirmishers or something else), including mercenaries recruited by barbarians too I think.

From BI, only units tagged as warcry capable have it.
So no more same mercenary unit has or has not warcry depending from which faction recruits it.

[Red Harvest]

Another warcry related question - before I got BI, when playing as the Romans the warcry ability for mercenary warbands was disabled - now it is enabled. Or am I imagining it? (I am playing a slightly modded version of RTW). Would this relate to what Red Harvest is talking about? I didn't really play 1.3 as I was too busy playing BI - now I've gone back to RTW so maybe this was in 1.3 not introduced in 1.5/6?

Yes, that is what I noticed as well. The new system CA adopted for BI and ported to RTW 1.3/1.5 is superior in that regard.

[Germanvs]

Slave-trading definately does not work, nor has it ever worked. :san_angry:

[player1]

One of a few things that got unhardcoded after the expansion.

[player1]

You mean pop growth bonus due to slave trade?

[Germanvs]

Yes, I mean that. The icon for increased population growth appears neatly, but if fact it doesn't do anything. Factual growth is the same as if no slaves were being traded.

Dragging off half the population upon capturing a settlement works splendid.

[Jambo]

Well, eventually one reared its ugly head in the RTW Imperial Campaign today (1.5). It was a siege assault where I was using large siege towers to assault a large stone wall. The city was the one beside Athens and Sparta (Corinth?).

Essentially all started fine - the siege towers were set against the walls and the men congregated round the foot of the towers. However, my praetorians simply wouldn't enter the towers! The only way I could achieve this was to constantly click the unit to the walls above and the men entered in dribs and drabs with each click.

Pity, all was going so well too. I think some others have noted this problem prior to this thread, but together it might be worth working out precisely where this problem lies. Currently I've no idea whether this is an issue with large stone walls or large siege towers yet, but I plan to find out.

[Red Harvest]

Yep, this one has been reported by a number over at .com. My own experience with a man bypassing the ramp of a small siege tower (before it dropped) and ending up on the wall while the rest were inside the tower. When I tried to send him on the game CTD'ed.

What unit size are you using?

[Atilius]

Saw something very similar to what RH experienced.

I had three siege towers attacking the walls of Larissa. They all reached the walls at about the same time but only one began to empty. The other two each had a single guy fall out of the tower onto the wall before the ramp dropped, but no one else followed. After selecting the units and clicking on the walls, several minutes later the soldiers finally began exiting the towers.

Fortunately, the game didn't crash.

I always use the "huge" unit scale but have never seen anything like this. This was the first time I had attacked a stone wall with the RTW 1.5 patch.

[Tyrac]

Saw something very similar to what RH experienced.

I had three siege towers attacking the walls of Larissa. They all reached the walls at about the same time but only one began to empty. The other two each had a single guy fall out of the tower onto the wall before the ramp dropped, but no one else followed. After selecting the units and clicking on the walls, several minutes later the soldiers finally began exiting the towers.

Fortunately, the game didn't crash.

I always use the "huge" unit scale but have never seen anything like this. This was the first time I had attacked a stone wall with the RTW 1.5 patch.


I had this same bug. 2 Towers and had one empty its unit as normal and the other let out one man. The tower draw bridge/gate/ramp was closed when i looked and I could not get men up it beyond that first one. This was in B.I. however and was on large unit settings.

[gardibolt]

The slavery population growth problem should be moved from the "new 1.5 bugs" category to "unfixed issues." It never worked in practice at all. Here's my post on testing from the Ludus Magna thread on Slave Resource:


OK, here's the breakdown turn by turn in 1.0 unpatched/unmodded (and no slave trader retinue), Normal tax rate:

Summer 270: After Segesta is enslaved, its pop is 450 and rate of growth is stated as 2% (1.5% base farming and .5% slavery, with no squalor). Everything except the pop stays the same for Segesta through the end of the test in Winter 267.
Arretium ends up with 4225 pop and 2% growth, (2.5% base farming, .5% farm upgrade less 1% squalor) after enslaving. Built the governor's house.

Winter 270: Segesta pop 457
Arretium pop 4309, growth rate drops to 1.5% (2.5 base + .5 farm upgrade - 1.5% squalor). Built roads.

Summer 269: Segesta pop 464
Arretium pop 4374, growth rate stated as back up to 2% (2.5 base+ .5 farm upgrade + .5% slavery - 1.5% squalor). Everything except the pop stays the same through the end of the test in Winter 267.

Winter 269: Segesta pop 471
Arretium pop 4440

Summer 268: Segesta pop 478
Arretium pop 4507

Winter 268: Segesta pop 485
Arretium pop 4575

Summer 267: Segesta pop 492
Arretium pop 4644

Winter 267: Segesta pop 499
Arretium pop 4714

From this, it seems clear that the .5% slavery bonus isn't actually getting added in. The Arretium pop increase matches the stated percentage in Summer and Winter 270. But when the slavery is added in 269, it never actually increases pop at the right rate--at 2% the Winter 269 pop should be 4461. But it only increases 1.5%, to 4440, indicating that the .5% kicker for slavery never gets added in. The Segesta population increase is never right, since the slavery kicker is there from the beginning: it should be increasing by 9 population, but it goes up by only 7---i.e., 1.5%

So this has never worked properly, even in 1.0. The population equation doesn't seem to be picking up the slavery bonus for whatever reason.

:san_cry:

Don't make Santa cry.

[Jambo]

Red H, I always play using Large unit size. Like I said, I could get them up in piecemeal amounts but this required incessant clicking on the walls above. Not sure whether the AI has problems with this or not as I've not experienced an AI assaulting one of my cities yet.

[Ludens]

1. Officers seem to all have their weapons now. Before they had a tendency to show up for battle at times with no sword. Lots of punching... (Several...need more time to confirm.)
Yesterday saw a brigand captain (commanding a militia cavalry) fleeing without his sword. I do not know if he started the battle with it (his unit had both skirmished and fought during the battle).

[professorspatula]

Officers still have the no weapon issue. Most of the time they have it, occasionally it disappears. It's been that way since day 1 as far as I've experienced it.

[Jambo]

It would seem the AI's units also get stuck entering the large siege towers too. This causes havoc to the whole AI siege assault procedure. :/

Is there anything WE can do to solve this problem? Like, mod out large siege towers, remove large and or epic walls? I've compared 1.3 and 1.5 descr_engines.txt and the only difference is the improvement of the ram (i.e. less likely to ignite).

Does ayone know yet whether this happens with the standard stone walls? The only walls I've found so far that causes the problem is the large stone walls and the siege towers used to assault them. There aren't enough epic walls around in my campaign yet to test whether they're borked too.

[Red Harvest]

Moderators et al.: I'm in the middle of a major relocation. I won't have much opportunity to update this thread for probably a week or more and have zero time for play testing (indeed I haven't had much opportunity for playtesting for days.) Please feel free to edit the list at the stop as you feel appropriate. This is not really "my" thread, but one for the community.

I'll check back when I can. Merry Christmas everyone. :san_smiley:

[Germanvs]

I must say I'm quite happy with 1.5: the game is actually challenging now!
The AI seems much more agressive now: Some factions now grow to considerable size, and many rebel provinces are now actually conquered by the larger tribes.

I have not played many campaigns (not even before 1.5) and I never have gotten far into the campaign as the many bugs forced me to patch or mod and start over again. All my campaigns have been as Julii.

So, my observations are mostly in comparison with 1.0 to 1.2 vs 1.5 (I didn't really bother with 1.3, as I couldn't stomach the every-turn save-load issue)

- In 1.5 I see that the nearby factions don't build many roads. If they do, it's late in the queue apparently. This is a probably a good thing, as roads should be a roman thing (at least in Northern Europe.)
- My diplomats now often get bad traits after unsuccesfull negotiations: a good thing again, as I used to contact many factions each turn to extort some money from them at no penalty. This is now not efective anymore.
- battles are much tougher now, probably due to the fixing if the VeryHard settings or other AI tactics that have improved.
- compared to v1.0 some provinces yield now more grain, thus more growth for the cities. Good: it used to be very difficult to raise armies in core Julii provinces.


In fact I'm so happy now, I'm finally thinking of modding the fantasy units (pigs, dogs, headhurlers, Helga's and such) out and replace them with something better!

[Germanvs]

Another thing I noticed:

I don't get the crossed swords anymore that used to appear on the site of a famous battle.

In fact, I don't see any such symbol on the whole map! (FOW is on, but I see plenty to expect a few of those signs, let alone that I've fought a few hard battles ;)

[Ludens]

I don't get the crossed swords anymore that used to appear on the site of a famous battle.

In fact, I don't see any such symbol on the whole map! (FOW is on, but I see plenty to expect a few of those signs, let alone that I've fought a few hard battles ;)
I did get several, but herioc victories seem harder to achieve. Also, my biggest victory against the odds, where the A.I. did not advance with a steel wall of phalanxes on my army but instead sent tried to use its hoplites to skirmish with my mass of velites/merc peltasts, did not produce such a marker.

[[GG]vonDöbeln]

Maybe it's been mentioned before but... Playing Armenians in RTW v1.6 and Cantabrian circle seems to be broken. When I click the button the unit (neither HA or Cataphract Archers work) shifts a bit, but never starts moving in a circle.

[GG]vD

EDIT!
Ehh I have NO IDEA why some parts of the text appears in red, bold letters! LOL

[Barbarossa82]

While the WRE Imperial German Bodyguards now have proper spear heads (and messed-up shields), the Imperial German Bodyguards for the Western Roman Empire Rebels still have the old model with the messed-up spears (and shields looking fine).

[SomeNick]

Hmmm I've been away for a few months and I'm a bit confused about the patch thing...

I don't see any crossed swords on map either in 1.3 btw..or storms, pilla thing blah blah etc etc..


Is 1.5 worth the trouble?... And I will lose my campaign saves again wont I?.................................................................................................. !

:wall:

Edit: I didn't it was in the read me anyway.... *ugh*
Hope they fixed the machine gun seige towers..


Thankyou for well thought out 27mb patch CA!

[fallen851]

When is the new patch to fix all this crap coming out? Anyone know?

As for the pila issue, does reducing ammo of pilum units to 1 do anything (I currently have 1.5 uninstalled, I don't like the pila issue)? So maybe they throw their pila and then charge fight normally?

[Red Harvest]

When is the new patch to fix all this crap coming out? Anyone know?Don't know...still hoping CA will do a thorough patch.


As for the pila issue, does reducing ammo of pilum units to 1 do anything (I currently have 1.5 uninstalled, I don't like the pila issue)? So maybe they throw their pila and then charge fight normally?
Several major problems with that. First, ammo count of one is not allowed (at least it was not allowed in any previous release I checked.) Second, even if the whole unit threw and it had only one pilum, the unit would have a few remaining pila to throw after the first. :dizzy2: Sounds strange...but the reason is that any signifers or officers will not throw pila, but they DO add to the total ammo count so most pila units can't exhaust their missiles in even increments (Yes, I have tested this for various units.)

[Red Harvest]

Mods, I'm not going to be updating this anymore. So edit as you see fit.

Thanks.


To other ORG players. Hope this has helped and I'll see you around. I'm moving on to other things.

[x-dANGEr]

Any help appreciated with regard to this problem:

Old graphics card-related bug with new twist, as far as I know. Just came back
after a long while to the game. It works fine on my older system, which runs
using a GeForce 4 Ti 4200.

However on my newer system, running the game on a GeForce FX 5200, there is
menu flickering and corruption which makes the game unplayable, as you might
know. Firstly, has there as yet been any way found to overcome this in RTW
alone?

Secondly, I in some way overcame this when I installed BI, in so much as RTW
and BI are both playable on the newer system. But now I find that several things
still do not work: [Presumably again due to the card?] There are no opening
cutscenes, for RTW or BI; several in-game graphics are missing. [No graphics in
the Senate tab, and numerous other graphics, e.g. captured wonder,
faction destroyed.] Is there any fix for this?
This happened to me before. I had 2 PCs, playing R: TW on one of them just fine. Then it got hit with Virus, so I went to the other one and played their. On the main menu, wherever I move my mouse, it stays their and laggs, I go to another menu, the first menu keeps showing up. Maybe the Graphics

[Oaty]

Flashfloods permanantly damage a province you can no longer build watchtowers/forts in that province and even after 30 years troop movement is so reduced that troops will usually avoid that province(with a highway) and go through nonroad terrain in an adjacent province.

crowding can cause some serious lag (nearlockup) at chokepoints phalanxes are the worst especially when they sit idle on a bridge and the rest of the army tries to go through that unit to get across.

[tai4ji2x]

Flashfloods permanantly damage a province you can no longer build watchtowers/forts in that province and even after 30 years troop movement is so reduced that troops will usually avoid that province(with a highway) and go through nonroad terrain in an adjacent province.


wow, it just never ends. :dizzy2:

perhaps also post this in the thread at ludus magna? people probably need to test and confirm this :wall:

[Mamba]

Has anyone mentioned the 237 B.C. bug yet?

I know for a fact that this bug didn't exist in 1.0, and yet in 1.5 it's here in force. I personally think that this is by far the most serious issue with the game at this point in time.

[gardibolt]

Yeah, I just got the 237 BC bug myself last night and it has brought my Carthage campaign to a great crashing halt. Just when I was starting to make some headway, too. :furious3: :help: :skull:

[Germanvs]

Throwing games is actually free of charge.

In the financial tab it will be noted, but when you actually compare the net-figure with what you have in your coffers, you'll see you didn't pay a dime.

Germanus runs off to issue build-orders for Arena's wherever possible

[Lord Dazed & Confused]

Whats the 237 BC bug ?

[gardibolt]

When you click to End Turn in Winter 237 BC, the game goes through all the AI turns, then CTDs. It seems to happen most frequently with a game that was started in 1.0, 1.1 or 1.2 and is continued in 1.5, but there are reports of it happening in games started in 1.5. I gave up on my Carthage campaign because of it and started a different campaign entirely in 1.5. If I hit 237 and it CTDs again, then I'm considering the game completely broken and will move on to something else.

If you started in an earlier version and got past 237 BC before switching the campaign to 1.5, then the same fate awaits you when you get to 167BC and possibly other dates. It appears to be tied to malfunctioning "historical events" that serve no useful purpose in the game.

[player1]

Do you have localized version of RTW?
I've read somewere that some localized versions have similar problem (game breaks on specific turn due to some bug in historic event translations).

[gardibolt]

Not unless you consider the US version 'localized.'

[player1]

Then what event happens in that year?

Maybe it can be easily fixed by editing text files.
(could be something simple as bad label for some event)

[player1]

In that year historic even about glass should appear.

Look this line from descr_events.txt file in campaign folder:


event historic through_a_glass_clearly
date 34 summer

I tried forcing that event to 3rd game turn and it didn't crashed game for me.
But, well I have RTW patched through BI, so it's maybe only non-BI users issue.

Anyway, try changing event to "date 2 summer", and see does game crash on 3rd turn.

[gardibolt]

I do have BI installed. I'm a total novice at modding so I'm not sure what you're suggesting and probably am ascairt to try it.

I did try the fix for the Italian historical events bug, which replaced the labels, but that didn't help.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Here's a bug I havent seen, Frankish Axe Heaban have a broken alpha chennel, their mail shirts have a black patch between their legs where it should be clear.

[SirGrotius]

Playing as the Alemanni, on my war dogs card, the trainer is missing his head. The trainers, fortunately, have a head on the battle map.

[NeoSpartan]

Humm... I bought the game in the US, I don't have BI, and the year 237 B.C went by along with the "See-Though Glass" event came and NOTHING happened.
Still playing with the Julii in VH/VH, year 225 B.C, starting to kick butt, and I didn't die years ago is because the Germans decided that 1 one of my cities was enough for them.

[player1]

I think it's the issue with old saved games.
The thing is that some of the ingame events got renamed with new patches.

Now, since events file is read only at the beggining of the game and store in save file, game tries to call event by their former name. But since there is no strings to be found for old name it crashes.

This happens for events regading carthaginian glass and baning of philosophy. They are the ones that got thier names changed with patches.

[gardibolt]

Do ballistae actually do anything at all to units? I tried targeting units and although I get the little bow & arrow symbol, no matter how long it's supposedly firing and reloading it never actually fires anything and the line indicating the ammunication never goes down. They're striking me as utterly useless. Same thing for scorpions. Are the lower forms of artillery busted or am I missing something?

[DVX BELLORVM]

Have you noticed that you sometimes cannot see the arena on the battle map?
In my current Brutii game, it happens in Pergamum, Thapsus and Cartgage.

On the other hand, in Sparta you can see arena, but Odeon is not shown:no:
I don't know if it is a bug in 1.5, or it was present in earlier versions too.

[DVX BELLORVM]

Some bugs I encountered during my Brutii campaign (RTW 1.5):

- legionaries in testudo formation can't pass through the city gates (maybe a feature?)
- during the preparations for the siege you sometimes can't select sap point (save and load game helps)
- when you are attacked while besieging enemy city, and the enemy city garrison acts as reinforcement, you can't see the stats of the garrison army
- soldiers sometimes can't enter siege towers (yes, i know it was mentioned before, but it is so serious it needs to be told over and over...)

[WarHawk1953]

Hello,
I am getting fustrated :wall: . I have patched the game with, 1.1,1.2,1.3 and 1.5. The problem I am having :

Playing Julii in imperial campaign, with Med/Med, large units. At least 12 times I would be playing 2 to 5 turns. The game will freeze, nothing moves, mouse frozen. At least 4 of the 12 times in crashed back to desktop.

Here is my system:
E-Machine T2245
Time of this report: 11/15/2005, 16:34:43
Machine name: LARRY
Operating System: Windows XP Home Edition (5.1, Build 2600) Service Pack 2 (2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr.050301-1519)
Language: English (Regional Setting: English)
System Manufacturer: eMachines, Inc.
System Model: Imperial
BIOS: Revision 0.90
Processor: Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.20GHz
Memory: 510MB RAM
Page File: 210MB used, 1037MB available
Windows Dir: C:\WINDOWS
DirectX Version: DirectX 9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
DX Setup Parameters: Not found
DxDiag Version: 5.03.2600.2180 32bit Unicode
HD 40Gig
HD 120Gig
DISPLAY NVIDIA NVIDIA GeForce FX 5500 256 memory(on board graphics turned off)
Media Avance Avance AC97 Audio
CDROM HL-DT-ST CD-RW GCE-8400B
CDROM HL-DT-ST DVD-ROM GDR8161B

Monitors
Model Max Resolution Viewable Area Serial Manufactured
PTW 2160 1600 x 1200 32 x 24 cm 6900 July 2004
Mouse Logitech Logitech-compatible Mouse PS/2
DirX 9c

By Whats required I have it.

Has anyone patched to 1.5 and have the same problem?:help:

[WarHawk1953]

Moderator,
Please move the above post to the Apothecary, Game Freezes thread. I have tried a fresh install updated drivers and only patches 1.1 and 1.2. Frezzing still takes place within 3 or four turns! So it is not patch 1.5

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Does anyone know where an explanation or just description of this 1.5 problem concerning adding any new buildings is to be found? Supposedly none can be added or something? Any information about this?

[tai4ji2x]

well, i'm going to bring this one up, since i've now been encountering it...

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=42055&page=1&pp=20

[Garvanko]

In my Julii campaign, Marian reforms happened as soon as I got an Imperial Palace in Patavium. Is this right?

Ive got the latest patch.

[player1]

Yes it is. Imperial palace in Italy or Sicily triggers the reforms.

[Garvanko]

Ahh ok. Thought that did not include Patavium for some reason. Thanks.

[WarHawk1953]

I have version 1.2 on my machine. With the bugs that have been found, I question would it be worth while to install 1.5? Is there a bugfixer for 1.5? The plus for 1.5 patch so far is a more agressive AI, have they improved the battle AI yet? The battle AI in MTW seemed a lot better and could surprise me.

[player1]

yes there is a bug-fixer, v3.05
(it work well with both basic RTW as well as expansion)

[Ludens]

I have version 1.2 on my machine. With the bugs that have been found, I question would it be worth while to install 1.5? Is there a bugfixer for 1.5? The plus for 1.5 patch so far is a more agressive AI, have they improved the battle AI yet? The battle AI in MTW seemed a lot better and could surprise me.
Whatever problems it may have, 1.5 has a lot less bugs than 1.2. The only major one is the memory leak which seems to affect people that do not have a whole lot of RAM. Battle A.I. has been improved: formations are better and generals seem less suicidal. It concentrates its forces better and can use flanking effectively. That said, it still has its quirks and is not at M:TW level. Despite this, I would still recommend it as it improves the game tremendously.

[Garvanko]

Battle A.I. has been improved: formations are better and generals seem less suicidal. It concentrates its forces better and can use flanking effectively.Agree completely. Especially as concerns generals - this was such a huge problem in 1.2.

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

I'm not sure if this is common knowledge, but there is an issue with apparent 'unit scattering' on the battlefield. This tedious bug happens to both the player's units and also the AI's units. I've only noticed its presence since installing RTW patch v1.5, IIRC this bug wasn't present in previous versions.

When (or sometimes before) your units engage in melee, some men within a unit(s) will split off (or scatter) from the formation, and then run off randomly across the map. Usually they will be holding their secondary weapon (if they have one), and cannot be ordered back into formation. I've also noticed that once the unit has scattered members, it will tend to flash even when the unit itself is highlighted.

I'm classing this as a bug because it seriously disrupts a formation. If this scattering happens to a phalanx unit, then the whole phalanx formation cannot be formed properly. Also, phalanx-capable units tend to engage with their secondary weapons rather than their pikes / spears, which is seriously annoying.

There is a technique to try and regain control of some members of a scattered unit - click the withdraw button / shorctut and you should be able to regain control of a few (if not all) of the scattered men. You'll know when you've regained control of a man when he is carrying his primary weapon and is heading back towards the main unit.

This bug has serious impacts upon gameplay. Once you've won a battle for example, you may have to wait for what seems an age before you actually get the victory message. This is because the AI's scattered units are still present on the battlefield - you have to wait for every single scattered man to leave the battlefield before you will win the battle. The only way to speed this up is by using the in-game speed controls, or move say a unit of generals bodyguard over each scattered man and hope that your general can pick each one off.

I've seen many posts of this problem over @ TWC, people believe that it was a modding project that contained this unit scattering bug. Well I'm sorry to say that the bug has most probably shipped with RTW v1.5 patch :furious3: It just never seems to end...

If anyone has a solution / workaround for this problem, please let me know.

[Helgi]

:shame: :shame: :shame: :shame: I've patched my RTW/BI to 1.6 and then after moding it to INVASIO BARBARORUM FLAGELLUM DEI, the 1.6 patch craped out to 1.4 again, is there a way to fix this so I'm back to 1.6 or should I just write off BI and just go with 1.5?
Really hating BI/Gold Edition,:wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: because of that little bug that knocks the patchs off after loading BI:help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :help: :wall: :wall: :wall: :help: :help: :help: :help: :wall: :wall: :wall: :help: :help: :shame: :shame:

[Kaidonni]

Actually, it deducts from your income per turn - depending on how frequent the games are. Just like units. So, you will get 400 less for throwing games, say, in Messana, monthly. Turn it back to yearly, and hey presto, your income per turn will go back to what it would have been had you not thrown those games monthly.

[Viking]

.
Here's a cute 1.3 bug for your amusement:

My two Greek armies besiege, assault and capture Apollonia from the Brutii. One of the armies, the one I had manually commanded, led by the king, stays in the city. The other, led by a family member and commanded by the AI, although simultaneusly occupied the plaza during the assault, remains outside to besiege the king's army!

https://img354.imageshack.us/img354/6883/03241it.th.jpg (https://img354.imageshack.us/my.php?image=03241it.jpg)

The king cannot move, as expected in a siege, and when I move the general I get the "siege will be broken" message, approve and everything is fine. ~:)
.

Now that`s the funniest picture I`ve seen for a while. :laugh4:

[Akka]

I'm surprised that nobody reported this one yet (or I simply missed it), but :

Big bug with the melée/ranged attack power

Ranged unit use their ranged attack power in melee (making Cretan Archers butchering the light cavalry you're sending to kill them, and making Pharaoh's Bowmen nightmarishingly strong units).

[Afro Thunder]

Is that true? Is there any way to confirm this? :dizzy2:

[ByzantineKnight]

Yes, ive seen it in the game, it hurts. Ive never actually had it used against me though.

[Ludens]

I'm surprised that nobody reported this one yet (or I simply missed it), but :

Big bug with the melée/ranged attack power

Ranged unit use their ranged attack power in melee (making Cretan Archers butchering the light cavalry you're sending to kill them, and making Pharaoh's Bowmen nightmarishingly strong units).
That was a bug with R:TW 1.0/1.1 but it was fixed with the 1.2 patch. Is it back? I never noticed it, but I haven't been playing vanilla much after 1.5.

[Caius]

Two bugs:
The music, some songs doesnt sound, thats wrong, and
FOR WHY HELL I CANNOT RETREAT FROM A CARTAGINIAN ATTACK?Yes, you are the Greeks, you retreat and you LOSSES all troops!And the problem is without figthing, they win

[Caius]

Other bugs
I was the Julii in a imperial campaign (RTW 1.5). When I end the turn, comes the turn of the rest.When it was the turn of Chartage, noting happened.
It stopped, i reload the game, but the problem stills on.
And the other is
For why a diplomat of a enemy faction says
Their demands:
Accept or will attack
Their offers:
Please do not attack
:no: :no: :no:
Please CA fix this bugs, or we arent going to paly RTW anymore

[ByzantineKnight]

That was a bug with R:TW 1.0/1.1 but it was fixed with the 1.2 patch. Is it back? I never noticed it, but I haven't been playing vanilla much after 1.5.

Yah, all the troops not engaged in melee can fire, not fair


For why a diplomat of a enemy faction says
Their demands:
Accept or will attack
Their offers:
Please do not attack

Please CA fix this bugs, or we arent going to paly RTW anymore

Thats not a Bug, they say leave us alone or we will attack, its stupid but not a bug

[Caius]

Two bugs:
The music, some songs doesnt sound, thats wrong, and
FOR WHY HELL I CANNOT RETREAT FROM A CARTAGINIAN ATTACK?Yes, you are the Greeks, you retreat and you LOSSES all troops!And the problem is without figthing, they win
ANY person have this problem?

[Ludens]

ANY person have this problem?
If you have no movement points left, you cannot retreat. This applies to you as well as to the A.I. I have no problems with the music, but that doesn't mean it works for everyone.


Yah, all the troops not engaged in melee can fire, not fair
That's not the same. Akka reported the infamous primary/secondary issue that delayed the release of the 1.2 patch. However, it was fixed in 1.2 and I haven't noticed it since.

[Caius]

If you have no movement points left, you cannot retreat. This applies to you as well as to the A.I. I have no problems with the music, but that doesn't mean it works for everyone.
I have movement pionts left, when the carthaginians attack me, sometimes i have to retreat,I click in the white flag and my troops die
FOW WHY?

[Ludens]

I have movement pionts left, when the carthaginians attack me, sometimes i have to retreat,I click in the white flag and my troops die
FOW WHY?
I don't know. If there is no retreat the retreat button should be greyed out. There have been reports of disappearing troops, but this seems to be a rare glitch.

[Caius]

Thank for the help, but I cant play as the Greek Cities because of thisglitch

[Caius]

Thats not a Bug, they say leave us alone or we will attack, its stupid but not a bug
I can make a sreenshot demonstrating this it is true

[ByzantineKnight]

I can make a sreenshot demonstrating this it is true

Ive seen it happen before, i just said it wasnt a bug, its just stupid

[Caius]

You are rigth ByzantineKnight.
Other error.
I am sieging a city with stone walls.When you siege a stone wall, you can build all the types of siege equipment.I did pass the turn and i'm going to the city and im going to create a sap point.Here is the problem, i cannot build,"Construction of this siege equipment is not posible".

[ByzantineKnight]

You are rigth ByzantineKnight.
Other error.
I am sieging a city with stone walls.When you siege a stone wall, you can build all the types of siege equipment.I did pass the turn and i'm going to the city and im going to create a sap point.Here is the problem, i cannot build,"Construction of this siege equipment is not posible".

Did you have enough people to have build points?

[Caius]

Yes, I have 300 building points, but that not the point, because you can build a sap point in more turns than 1

[ByzantineKnight]

Yes, I have 300 building points, but that not the point, because you can build a sap point in more turns than 1

Do you have any patches installed or ATW/BI, do you just have a bad general, or something else

[Caius]

Something else,I guess

[ByzantineKnight]

Ok then i dono what happened, does it work now?

[Caius]

Sorry, I'm not sieging a city with stone wall at this moment

[ByzantineKnight]

Do you mean you were not seiging a city with stone walls or that you finished that city and have moved on to a new one?

[Caius]

For why a diplomat losses all or part of his skills when he fails a negotiation?

[ByzantineKnight]

I dont know, ive never seen that before

[Ludens]

For why a diplomat losses all or part of his skills when he fails a negotiation?
For the same reason he gains skill when he succeeds? This is not a bug. It's just an unbalanced feature.

[Caius]

For the same reason he gains skill when he succeeds? This is not a bug. It's just an unbalanced feature.
No.For example, i send a diplomat who have a diplomat trait, he fails and he losses the diplomat trait

[Ludens]

No.For example, i send a diplomat who have a diplomat trait, he fails and he losses the diplomat trait
What's wrong with that? If he succeeds in the next negotiation he will gain it again. The system is unbalanced, but not buggy.

[ByzantineKnight]

What is the use of Infulence anyway, Ive never had it affect a disscussion and ive had like 7 or 8 infulence.

[teja]

What is the use of Infulence anyway, Ive never had it affect a disscussion and ive had like 7 or 8 infulence.

This is not a bug but a question for gaming. You should make your question clearer. Do you mean the "influence" of a diplomat or of a general?
I assume you mean generals. The more influence, the better a general perform as a governor (affects loyalty), the bigger the chance of becoming the heir of a fraction, the better his chances in diplomatic talks - and if he is the leader of a fraction, he will not that often be the target of a new war. There will be more affects maybe, but that is what came back of my memories on first sight.

[Caius]

Here is the problem:
I send, for example, a diplomat, who haves a diplomat trait to make an alliance.The others says no, and when say no that diplomat loses the trait
and in the lists of retinues and traits says none

[Ludens]

Here is the problem:
I send, for example, a diplomat, who haves a diplomat trait to make an alliance.The others says no, and when say no that diplomat loses the trait
and in the lists of retinues and traits says none
If a diplomat fails on a mission, he will lose traits. If he succeeds, he will gain them. Not a bug.

[ByzantineKnight]

This is not a bug but a question for gaming. You should make your question clearer. Do you mean the "influence" of a diplomat or of a general?
I assume you mean generals. The more influence, the better a general perform as a governor (affects loyalty), the bigger the chance of becoming the heir of a fraction, the better his chances in diplomatic talks - and if he is the leader of a fraction, he will not that often be the target of a new war. There will be more affects maybe, but that is what came back of my memories on first sight.

I ment the influence of a diplomat, sorry

[Vergilius]

I'm still having problems with the 'issuing an individual order to a group' bug.
If I, for example, order a group of cavalry (for example 3 units) to attack a distant enemy, they just attack the closest enemy (which mostly happens to be a wall of spears).

[ByzantineKnight]

I'm still having problems with the 'issuing an individual order to a group' bug.
If I, for example, order a group of cavalry (for example 3 units) to attack a distant enemy, they just attack the closest enemy (which mostly happens to be a wall of spears).

I have that problem too, you just have to tell them to move near the unit you want to kill and when that unit is the closest to you, charge!

And if one of your horse units charge whatever you didn't want it to, it delays reinforcements for the unit you charged.

[Vergilius]

hmm.. I think I've encountered another bug..

if I put my troops like this:

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v682/ssj18vegeta/twbug.jpg

the archers won't work; they'll make the shooting animation, but arrows won't appear nor will they hit anything...

[Ludens]

I think your archer's target is blocked by the Spartans. Missile units will try not to shoot friendly troops.

[kietotheworld]

When I try to start the game in full screen mode, the right half of the game screen is cut off, and the left half is stretched over the entire monitor.

When I start it in windowed mode, it crashes to desktop whenever I try to start a battle. Any ideas?

[Ludens]

When I try to start the game in full screen mode, the right half of the game screen is cut off, and the left half is stretched over the entire monitor.

When I start it in windowed mode, it crashes to desktop whenever I try to start a battle. Any ideas?
I think this question stands a better chance of being answered in the Apothecary (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=15). It's our tech-help forum.

[Caius]

Other bug is the End Turn bug.
Click in the End Turn button and...CTD!
You cant play ANY campaign.

Regards

[jhhowell]

Apologies if this has already been noted - I couldn't find anything when I searched.

Elephants are listed as type "weapon cannot be upgraded", but when one of my elephant units helped take a town with an armory and retrained to get +1 armor with the rest of the army, the elephants also came out with +3 attack (gold weapon icon).

[Denizar]

When I am sieging an epic wall city with siege towers, the towers reach the walls, but my men wont climb it... this is so annoying.. does this have a fix? I've got 1.5 RTW and downloaded a bug-fixer too (the one that solves the end turn CTD problem)

[jhhowell]

When I am sieging an epic wall city with siege towers, the towers reach the walls, but my men wont climb it... this is so annoying.. does this have a fix? I've got 1.5 RTW and downloaded a bug-fixer too (the one that solves the end turn CTD problem)

I've seen something like that with large walls (both RTW 1.5 and BI 1.6, both bug-fixed as above). The troops mill around at and just within the base of the tower - march slightly into the tower, turn and march right back out. And it's not consistent - one tower might have this problem while another just down the wall works perfectly. I've found that intensive micromanagement can eventually get the unit up the tower, but it takes forever (if you can afford the time, you probably didn't need that unit's help anyway...). You just have to keep selecting the unit and clicking to move to the top of the wall. If you zoom in all the way you'll see 2-4 guys go up the ladder into the tower each time. Wait a while for the traffic to clear on the ladders, repeat, they'll get up there eventually.

The AI doesn't know about this "fix" so if AI troops get stuck, you've just won the siege defense.

In practice a better fix (short of a patch - that would be ideal!) would probably be to emphasize saps and onagers rather than siege towers when faced with large/epic walls. That's my plan, anyway.

[Caius]

I was being sieged.
The Gauls(the enemy) haved ladders.They put it into the wall and they started to climb.
The first troops were killed and that troops entered in panic.There was men climbing, and when the flag turned white, they were going to the ground.
All the infantry of the enemy died and the battle automaticaly finished(They have cavalry).I dont have screenshoots.Is this a bug?

[ByzantineKnight]

I dont have screenshoots.Is this a bug?

The Truth: Yes, this is a bug.

The Lie: No, it is just really good luck!!

[Caius]

Other bug.Sorry if it is posted back.
Greeks vs. Rebels. (Autoresolved battle)
1 turn remaining and it is the turn of the Rebels.They will fight.Draw.
And the bug is... The Rebels sally again!.Draw again.They sally again. I have a Victory.
Where is the sally one time per turn feature?

[ByzantineKnight]

Other bug.Sorry if it is posted back.
Greeks vs. Rebels. (Autoresolved battle)
1 turn remaining and it is the turn of the Rebels.They will fight.Draw.
And the bug is... The Rebels sally again!.Draw again.They sally again. I have a Victory.
Where is the sally one time per turn feature?

Not sure...

[jhhowell]

Rebel Commando Super Peasants

I thought this was a fluke the first time it happened (see humiliating defeats thread), but Egyptian-style rebel peasants near Siwa are bugged. Unlike every other unit in the game (including Eastern-style rebel peasants over in the Arabian desert, for example), these guys ignore the spears of a pike phalanx. I had a full unit of Levy Pikemen fighting the peasants in a one on one battle. Normally when a phalanx attacks another unit, they pause when they reach thrusting range and fight from that position. Against the bugged peasants, the phalanx continued to advance until the front rank of the phalanx reached melee range of the front rank of the peasants. The peasants showed no signs of even noticing the ranks of spearpoints and pike shafts moving past their torsos. Once combat started, spear thrusts from the back ranks did appear to have some effect, but most of the pikemen had to fight with their shortswords. Result: peasants take ~50% casualties, Levy Pikemen defeated and annihilated.

Just to make sure this isn't supposed to happen, I set up the identical battle as a custom battle - only difference was an Egyptian flag over the peasants instead of a rebel flag. This time it went precisely as one would expect, the peasants were quickly destroyed for trivial losses to the pikemen. I therefore assume that the bug relates to the combination of Egyptian-style peasants with Rebel control, for whatever that may be worth.

There may be more to these bugged peasants than just ignoring pikes - an identical unit had previously defeated (but not destroyed) a unit of Scythed Chariots as I noted in my humiliating defeats post.

If anyone else has had this problem and knows of a fix (other than remembering to use overwhelming force appropriate for a much stronger unit than mere peasants), I'd love to hear about it!

[jmb777]

I just purchased Rome: Total War Gold a few days ago, which includes RTW and BI. After installing RTW, I saw it was version 1.5. Then I installed BI, and the version went to 1.3. BI was at 1.4. So, after getting mad, I got the 1.6 patch, which brought RTW to 1.5 and BI to 1.6.

The game seems to work fine. However, I just played the Prologue of RTW. After taking over a settlement, the gold in the bottom right of the screen seemed to no longer match the gold count in my end of turn reports. It was 3000 more. I cycled through several turns where I should have lost gold, but each time my gold increased! I don't understand this, and I can't find anyone else who has had either of these problems (installation and the gold weirdness).

Am I getting gold from some source I don't know about, is the Prologue bugged, or should I just do an uninstall and reinstall RTW and see what happens?

[jmb777]

As a follow up to my previous post, I've been told that you get extra money in the Prologue. I've been playing the campaign and things are adding up fine, so I'm happy. :)

[unsung]

Here's a fun one:
My camera in battle mode is always moving- sometimes it works right, sometimes it decides that if I can't make up my mind, then it will just move forward all the time.
Or spin.
Or go left.
So, I have to play the battles holdin gdown either ctrl or alt.

By the way, anyone know what I can do about this?
I'm guessing I'm not the first with this problem, But I found nothing in the apothecary.

[Caius]

The RTW 1.5 runs more faster.It doesnt loads all the music at all.(of 36 music songs they use 3 battle, 1 campaign, 3 marching and 3 tension sounds.)

[Caius]

a bug.Unfixed bug
Roman pila is trowed to the ground and this disappears.This happens when they have fire at will on and they are being charged.In that moment, they change to melee.And when you say attack they take their pila again

[Caius]

Urban Cohort pila can be throwed without having more pila to throw.Weird bug in RTW 1.0

And the siege bug happened again!

Other, heroic victories and crushing defeats are not saved at all.Some battles yes, some battles no.

[Caius]

The City Antioch of The Seleucid Empire can trained an Elephant being sieged.:inquisitive:

[Ludens]

Urban Cohort pila can be throwed without having more pila to throw.Weird bug in RTW 1.0

And the siege bug happened again!

Other, heroic victories and crushing defeats are not saved at all.Some battles yes, some battles no.


The City Antioch of The Seleucid Empire can trained an Elephant being sieged.:inquisitive:
I don't think there is much point in reporting bugs of R:TW 1.0 when there are already four patches available. Anyway, as there is no indication that CA/SEGA will release another patch, the use of this thread has become rather moot.

The pila issue may be caused by the fact that a unit's officers also carry munition, so when a unit of legionaries has thrown two volleys of pila, they still have the officer's pila left to throw. This is too small an amount to show up on the unit card.

[Caius]

The Second bug you have quoted is a RTW 1.5 bug.

Anyway, as there is no indication that CA/SEGA will release another patch, the use of this thread has become rather moot.

Gah!We need a RTW 1.5.1 version or something similar.This game still bugged.

Or we, the players, must fix the CA errors?:no:.
CA must do it.For the good of the RTW players.But CA will not do it.And RTW will still fixed.
If any CA staff member read this, please release a new patch!

[Ludens]

The Second bug you have quoted is a RTW 1.5 bug.
Which bug do you mean?


Or we, the players, must fix the CA errors?:no:.
CA must do it.For the good of the RTW players.But CA will not do it.And RTW will still fixed.
Ideally, you would be right, but in practice there is not a single recent game without bugs. Games have become too complex for that. It's not realistic to expect of developers that they fix everything: there is too much that can go wrong, and developers have only limited amounts of time and money to spend on a game that has already been released. Anyway, all the major issues of R:TW have been fixed, so I don't see why we absolutely, positively need another patch.

[Caius]

thats my opinion, Ludens.off-topic thread is this.
I know nothing is perfect.

[davidchandlee]

I just posted my problem in the Entrance Hall so members should look there if they care to help me. Meanwhile I realize I have had a few problem, eg my arrow keys used to work for directing the camera, but one day they stopped working and never have again. I must use a,w,s and so on instead (only left hand of course. Any ideas:help:
:inquisitive: I wonder, too, if there is a way to say a picture of a battle scene (i don't have a print screen key on my laptop)
Thanks and Happy New Year (only 12 hours away here near the date line) to all members.

[lastofthelight]

This is a wierd bug. Rome: Total War works fine for me, as does the Alexander Campaign, but Barbarian Invasion crashes upon startup - it shows the logo screens then goes to the desktop.

Odd.

[guineawolf]

is this count as a bug?coz i am playing Scipii,and i oredi save 4 million for future civil war with my fellow romans,but suddenly it change to 160000....my 4 million gone......arrrgghhh!!:oops: :furious3:

[ByzantineKnight]

is this count as a bug?coz i am playing Scipii,and i oredi save 4 million for future civil war with my fellow romans,but suddenly it change to 160000....my 4 million gone......arrrgghhh!!:oops: :furious3:

WOW!!! How did you get that much money??

On topic: Either it is a huge coruption, or, yes it is a bug.

[moderniconoclast]

heres one. whenever i log onto multiplayer it usually logs on (sometimes it doesnt) but after i play one match, 2 maximum, it just exits out and i cant log back in. its very annoying and gay

[AstroNerdBoy]

I just purchased "RTW Gold Edition" which comes with "Barbarian Invasion." Since I read that "BI" changes things and I wanted to play the original game first, I haven't installed it. A card came with the game with the CD Key, stating that I would be prompted to enter the CD Key during installation. I wasn't, but the readme file says that there would be no prompt to enter the CD Key.

I tried running the game but after the copyright screen, it comes up with a second window (that I can never bring to the front) which is labeled "Protection Error." So I installed the patches and it still comes up with "Protection Error."

Right now I'm irritated. I guess I should have done my homework, but this was an impulse buy because a year and a half (or so) ago, some co-workers were all playing this game and raving over it and so I thought, "what the heck, I'll get it."

My machine more than meets the requirements since it is only a year old and top of the line.

Since "Protection Error" is coming up, it is almost as if the game is looking for the CD Key to have been entered, but since it was never asked for, how could I enter it? Any suggestions on how to fix this would be appreciated.

Thanks.

[Ludens]

Try searching the apothecary (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=13): perhaps someone encountered this problem before. I am afraid I cannot help you further.

[guineawolf]

WOW!!! How did you get that much money??

On topic: Either it is a huge coruption, or, yes it is a bug.
temple of saturn=25%law prevent corruption,greece cities port,south eastern teritory ports,and legions..a unit worth more than it cost,garrison with peasant only,or using monthly games and races replace those peasant garrisons in huge populations cities...like carthage,it takes 10-12 peasant=1k-1.2k denarii for garrisons upkeep while monthly games and races take only 800denarii,think about there is 200 to 400 denarii save up for every cities each turn......think of that they are volunteers for maintaining public orders and doing the fire fight duties,then you can use them instead of town watch(just using town watch at front line only,or place only 1 unit as prefecture as a lead),then perhaps you will feel comfortable to use them...:2thumbsup:

there is too many garrisons upkeep that consume your faction income,don't you think..deal with it..

on topic:either that it is a become protectorate bug they talk about,or it will be about another bug that i oredi meets this problem twice,both of them happen after i reach 10 shield of popularity with people....

does anyone reach 10 shield of popularity be4?

now i am playing with Brutii campaign,see if it gonna happen again?

[Aradan]

I can't believe sth like that is connected in any way with your popularity with the people. It's possible that it's not a bug in the usual sense. Perhaps the amount of denarii only goes up to (2^23)/2 which allows values from -(2^23) to (2^23) - 1. That's about -4.2 to 4.2 millions. So perhaps when you go over that value your money is set NEW_MONEY=MONEY mod CONST, where CONST = (2^23) - 1.
If you had (eg) 4.19 millions and then you gained 170,000, it would reset your treasury to 160,000...

Anyway, just a thought... If it happens again at the same amount of money, you can be fairly sure it's probably it.

[guineawolf]

I can't believe sth like that is connected in any way with your popularity with the people. It's possible that it's not a bug in the usual sense. Perhaps the amount of denarii only goes up to (2^23)/2 which allows values from -(2^23) to (2^23) - 1. That's about -4.2 to 4.2 millions. So perhaps when you go over that value your money is set NEW_MONEY=MONEY mod CONST, where CONST = (2^23) - 1.
If you had (eg) 4.19 millions and then you gained 170,000, it would reset your treasury to 160,000...

Anyway, just a thought... If it happens again at the same amount of money, you can be fairly sure it's probably it.
not in the same 10 shield poularity with people situation?

[Aradan]

It seems very improbable to me, despite any flaws in the game's code, that sth *that* irrelevant can have *such* an effect on your money. A quick way to test that is by cheatcodes. Save your game and then add via the console command enough gold, so that you have 4,194,000 (it's very close to 2^22). See if everythging goes well until then. If yes, try to add 1,000 more denarii. If your treasury drops to about 700 denarii, congrats, you've found another RTW bug! You win a used laundry machine!!

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

Hi guineawolf,
May I suggest that you attempt re-creating this bug with R:TW 1.5. It may have, possibly, been fixed by the CA's coders somewhere between 1.1 (the old version) and 1.5 (the latest version) of R:TW. Hope this helps, cheers!

[Afkazar]

gah double post!
Anyone know how to delete posts? Laggy Internets.

[guineawolf]

Hi guineawolf,
May I suggest that you attempt re-creating this bug with R:TW 1.5. It may have, possibly, been fixed by the CA's coders somewhere between 1.1 (the old version) and 1.5 (the latest version) of R:TW. Hope this helps, cheers!

perhaps,but after spent a lot of time on 1.1,and compare with the bugs still exist at 1.5 post at 1.5 version bugs,i rather play with 1.1 then.......

thanks...:yes:

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

I do understand what you mean gunieawolf, however, although you may enjoy 1.1, may I suggest that you upgrade to 1.2 to get the closest to 1.5, yet less buggy, version. 1.2 is the next patch on, and includes extensive statistic re-balancing and many other things that change your game-play experience - often for the better. Although it is not bug free and is still not perfect, it is an improvement over 1.1 containing fewer small glitches. The great 1.2 patch can be found here (http://games.softpedia.com/get/Patch/Rome-Total-War-Patch.shtml). Hope this helps you, cheers!

[guineawolf]

I do understand what you mean gunieawolf, however, although you may enjoy 1.1, may I suggest that you upgrade to 1.2 to get the closest to 1.5, yet less buggy, version. 1.2 is the next patch on, and includes extensive statistic re-balancing and many other things that change your game-play experience - often for the better. Although it is not bug free and is still not perfect, it is an improvement over 1.1 containing fewer small glitches. The great 1.2 patch can be found here (http://games.softpedia.com/get/Patch/Rome-Total-War-Patch.shtml). Hope this helps you, cheers!

but some post have point out that 1.2 AI are stupid than 1.1,but i oredi think of experiencing those patch for myself after i finish my current campiagn,still have to try all faction yet so i can compare them at 1.2 or 1.5.

then i will post up all my saved game(1 turn before capture Rome after conquered the whole map),coz i think some people here will need it to do research,where should i post them?.....hope those will help...:yes: thanks for the link to 1.2 version patch,coz i can't find them at official totalwar.net site.....:beam:

[Cloggsy]

RTW Gold Edition Fault/issue...

My son bought himself RTM Gold Edition and we haven't been able to play it yet :embarassed:

The game installs fine, loads up fine, the menu screens all operate fine, but when you click to start your game (single player mode) and the first Senate instruction scroll drops down on the screen, the game freezes... You can Ctrl+Esc back to your desktop, but if you click back onto the game on the task-bar it locks the computer up completely & the only way of resolving the issue is to hit 'reset' (which I really don't like doing TBH!) Whilst on the desktop, you can 'bin' the game using 'Task Manager'

Can anyone point me in the right direction? :dizzy2:

[Fate]

Okay, i dont know if this has been mentioned, as i cant really be bothered reading through 18 pages, but her goes.

Been playing an RTW 1.5 campaign as the Armenians, and i've been in a lengthy war with egypt.
When besieging antioch i decided to attack the largely undefended city, no men on the walls. I sent a siege tower at it, with Cilician Pirates manning the tower. It reached the walls no problem, but then it took about 12 minutes for the door to drop and for them to reach onto the walls. By this point, i'd already gotten my HA's in through a side gate by attacking the relief force.

My point being, why the hell would it take so long to fill the tower? Is it something to do with the horde shape of the unit (opposed to rank and file), or just an odd bug?
If there's been more men in defence i couldve been in trouble.

[Caius]

RTW Gold Edition Fault/issue...

My son bought himself RTM Gold Edition and we haven't been able to play it yet :embarassed:

The game installs fine, loads up fine, the menu screens all operate fine, but when you click to start your game (single player mode) and the first Senate instruction scroll drops down on the screen, the game freezes... You can Ctrl+Esc back to your desktop, but if you click back onto the game on the task-bar it locks the computer up completely & the only way of resolving the issue is to hit 'reset' (which I really don't like doing TBH!) Whilst on the desktop, you can 'bin' the game using 'Task Manager'

Can anyone point me in the right direction? :dizzy2:
Hello,

Try installing your copy again, if that doesnt work, then ask for a repleace.
By the way, did you try to upgrade your video drivers?

[Kobal2fr]

@Fate : from the "RTW 1.5 Bugs and Patch Changes" topic, very first post :


5. There have been quite a few reports of problems with siege towers, particularly the larger ones. Typically, men will mill about running in and out and can't be commanded. Eventually, they move up the tower. Sometimes they bypass the tower and end up on the wall before the ramp opens, this can cause a CTD. (MAt, and others.)

[Cloggsy]

By the way, did you try to upgrade your video drivers?

No, 'fraid not :wall:

[Fate]

Kobal2fr, thanks, i didnt get round to reading it, too many stickies, too many threads overall, jsut thought id bring this to people's attention, but it seems that isnt neccessary!

[IceWolf]

Sarmobriva the Black Hole. I'm playing a Julii campaign and recently took Sarmobriva witha full stack. Now I tried to move 1/2 the stack outta there to make room for the peasant garrison, but they vanished int thin air afterwards. Now I've moved 2 peasants into there and there's stilll a 1/2 stack including 2 generals in there but I can't move anyone and there's no flag above the city indicating that it's occupied. What the hell? Has this happened to you here or in another terrritory?

IceWolf

[Ludens]

Does the city display the out-of-sight "fog"? I've seen this happen to cities that had been recently conquered. Reloading the game always helped. Mind you, I don't recall seeing it since I installed the 1.5 patch.

[mrdun]

Killed Lucco who was Gaulish in Osca, cut screen showed Blue clothing on a green coloured horse.

Family members becoming Pontifex Maximus before other offices.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Memory Leak confirmed at 2G RAM.

It only happens later, much later. My RTW has been on for like 3 days and I finally got the deadly lag and quit. Here is what Task Manager has to say:

https://img39.imageshack.us/img39/383/leak2gb.jpg

At lower RAM amounts it hits much faster, such as in a few hours.

Posting this for posterity. It's been long since I gave up hope on CA; didn't and won't buy Empire or any other future products. :no:
.